Music Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. I'm calling to order the zone change hearing of the Lexington-Fader Urban County government. This public hearing is now open. We have quorum. Clerk, may I have a roll call, please? Council Member Elliott Baxter? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Fogle? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Gray? Council Member Legree? Council Member Lynch? Present. Council Member Menares? Council Member Plowman? Here. Councilmember Reynolds? Here. Councilmember Savigny? Here. Councilmember Sheehan? Here. Councilmember Worley? Here. Vice Mayor Wu? Here. Councilmember Fred Brown? Here. Councilmember James Brown? And Councilmember Allinger? Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you very much. Just so the public knows, and I will explain our proceedings throughout this so everybody can follow along. A zone change hearing requires a quorum of 10 council members. We currently have 11. We have several absences, including council member James Brown, who was advised by our legal department to recuse for a potential conflict of interest. Clerk, may I have the second reading of the ordinance, please? Yes, sir. One, an ordinance changing the zone from a single family residential R1D zone to a mobile home park M1P zone for 16.541 net, 16.754 gross acres for property located at 421 Price Road, a portion of Fayette MHCLP Council District 2. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right, my name is Dan Wu. I'm the vice mayor, and I will be presiding over this meeting. I'm going to lay out how this meeting is going to work. Council members, please write down and hold all your questions to the end as we'll be able to ask them after all the presentations are finished. Council members, also please be aware that you must be here for the entirety of these proceedings. If you leave for the proceedings for any reason, you cannot return to them. I'm going to shoot for having a break in an hour and a half, two hours, depending on how the flow of the meeting goes. And we'll figure that out. So please do not get up to go to the bathroom or do anything else. When we take a break, we will do an official recess and pause the meeting. If we, for any reason, fall below quorum, we must pause the meeting and make an effort to restore quorum. I think this point, Tracy Jones, you might clarify, because council members need to stay for the entire meeting, I'm not entirely sure if restoring quorum is possible if we drop below it. Well, it depends. I mean, if you're taking a pause because somebody's leaving the room and they're coming back, you can pause the meeting and you can gain your quorum back. If somebody's leaving permanently and you've lost your quorum, then you've lost your quorum. Gotcha, thank you very much, appreciate that. So I'm going to start off by swearing in all those in attendance who plan to or wish to speak during today's public hearing. If you all would please raise your right hand for me. So anybody who's planning to speak tonight. Do you swear or affirm that any testimony you give at this hearing will be true and to the best of your knowledge? All right, thank you very much. If you are planning to speak, I do ask that you stay for the duration of this hearing. We do have folks out in overflow. There I believe is about a seven second delay. So by the time I get to calling on people for public comment, I'll be sure to kind of line folks up and say, so and so is speaking, so and so is up next, so and so is in line. That way people have a chance to get into the chambers for that. My job as the presiding officer is to facilitate this hearing and is within my purview to make judgments about whether the evidence being introduced is relevant and or repetitious. Have the witness list been provided to the clerk? Well the chair has them if that works. All right, so I have the witness list. And all printed materials that will be presented should also be provided to the clerk and they will distribute them to us up here. Tonight presentations from all parties will be 20 minutes each as previously agreed upon. We will begin with a presentation from planning staff on behalf of the Planning Commission, and they are subject to cross-examination, followed by a presentation by the petitioner, similarly subject to cross-examination, and finally a presentation by the opposition, also subject to cross-examination. All those cross-examinations will be five minutes. Next up is public comment. Each public comment will be limited to three minutes, and we ask that you state your name and council district for the record. If you like to speak during public comment, you can sign up outside. We have an iPad set up with some of our legislative aides and officers out there. And you have 30 minutes from the start of this hearing to sign up. So we started, I think, right at 6 o'clock. You'll have until 6.30 to sign up. There will also be an opportunity for all presenting parties to give a five-minute rebuttal and also an opportunity for a three-minute summation. then there will be opportunity for council members to ask questions of all the presenters and an opportunity if there is new information that is introduced for rebuttal at that point the hearing will be declared closed and the council members will deliberate then a roll call vote will be taken to adopt findings of fact after that a roll call vote will be taken to approve the ordinance any questions from council members or staff I think this is we've through a few of these so but thank you all for coming out and taking time out of your evening let's go ahead and get started we'll start with the presentation from planning staff please good evening vice mayor wu members of the council my name is tracy wade i am the planning services planning manager in the division of planning tonight i am happy to present to you a recommendation from the urban county planning commission related to what we call a map amendment request or most commonly known as a zone change and this is for case number pln mar 24-10 and the applicant is fayette mhc lp i do have a number of items to enter into the record for tonight's hearing and so we'll go through those and then move on to our presentation. The first item is a copy of the legal advertisement that was placed in the newspaper for tonight's hearing. It was also published on the city's website. The second is a sworn affidavit stating that the mail notification letters were sent for the property owners within 500 feet of the subject property as well as the supplemental notice area. for the property completed as required the third item is also something that you have at your seat tonight and that is the final report from the urban county council our planning commission excuse me it includes a summary of the meeting and who spoke and their objections as well as the application packet justification from the applicant summary staff report and the minutes from the public hearing that occurred in august in addition to that i've placed at your seating an amended sheet we had a errant finding that got in there that should have been deleted based on the public hearing so um it's a renumbering of item 3 here. So you have 3A, B is deleted, C, D, and E. Sorry, C and D. Exhibit 4 is presentation materials that were submitted at the time of the public hearing with the Planning Commission. This includes a presentation from the applicant, proposed disapproval language from the objectors, public comment that we receive in the division of planning prior to the hearing, petitions, as well as a particular article that was entered related to when the subdivision adjoining was built. I was gonna wanna use this one. Exhibit five is the Imagine Lexington 2045 plan. This is our adopted comprehensive plan. Exhibit six and seven are the current zoning ordinance and land subdivision regulations adopted by the Urban County Council. Then at your place, I have also provided copy of article 10 of the zoning ordinance which is specifically the m1p zone which is not often sought so i wanted to make sure that you had a copy of that today to reference sorry and then the last exhibit is the powerpoint presentation which you also have at your seat from the division of planning which summarizes the planning commission's recommendation Okay, so let's get started. Ms. Wade, I'm going to interrupt you for just one second for a little bit of housekeeping. Because of fire code, we need everybody in the chambers to be seated. If you cannot find a seat in chambers, I would urge you to go to the overflow area in our mezzanine, but we can't have folks standing in chambers, please. Thank you very much. Ms. Wade, please continue. Thank you. So let's get started. Tonight the request is to rezone a piece of property from an existing single family residential R1D zone to the mobile home park M1P zone. It's 16.5 acres of net property and then when we rezone to the center line it's approximately 16.75 acres. This property is 6, or sorry, 421 Price Road or at least a portion of that particular address. applicant is seeking to expand an existing mobile home park so a description of the area and where we are the mobile the existing mobile home park and the subject property are located on the north side of Price Road and in this graphic the white area in the middle here is representative of the subject property and then the colored around it is representative of existing zoning and the border that you see colored is representative of the 500 foot notice. So those are the properties that were received notification within our standard notification practices. So if we zoom in a little bit closer, the existing zoning in the area includes single family residential to the north and to the east, and this is the St. Martin's Village neighborhood. To the west is the existing Suburban Point mobile home park, and it is in an M1P zone. To the south are several smaller subdivisions located in an R2 zone. There is a church or a place of worship across Price Road from the subject property as well. And in this corner of green that you see is an existing agricultural urban property, property, and that is the location of the Cove Haven Cemetery. Just a little bit further to the west of the Cove Haven Cemetery is the Lexington Cemetery, and then just other markers in the area might include commercial areas on Georgetown and Lima Drive. There's also multifamily residential along Lima. Again, St. Martin's Village to the east and north, as well as other industrial uses to the north actually this is an industrial use it's an industrial zone but it's a park yeah so georgetown road is to the east main thoroughfare and then west it's a bit off the screen here but west main street leesetown road is to the west so price road does connect between leesetown road and georgetown road in this area of our community this is an aerial photograph just depicting some of the development that does exist in the area again you can see single-family residential neighborhoods to the north east and south the cemeteries further to the south and west and then the existing mobile home park which includes approximately 550 mobile home sites so the applicant today is proposing rezoning to the m1p zone in order to expand the mobile home park by approximately 52 sites basically each individual site would hold a mobile home so this is the existing view from price road into the property the property currently has has a single family home on it or did historically and that would be the only use on the property so to the in the view to your left are the existing mobile homes and your view to the right is the St. Martin's Village neighborhood. This is just a view looking down Price Road to the north from the existing driveway into the subject property. And then there's these are a few views from the stub streets there are currently three stub streets from St. Martin's Village neighborhood into the subject property. you can get a sense of the character of the area and then let's kind of jump back into the applicants request so the applicant did request to rezone the property and the staff and the Planning Commission review every zone change quest a request in light of our adopted comprehensive plan so the 2023 comprehensive plan also known as Imagine Lexington 2045 lays out our vision for the community goals, objectives, and policies that we're hoping to achieve with development as well as other aspects of government. So the goals and objectives are outlined for the subject property as well as policies, but what comes into play most often for our development proposals is our place builder development criteria. So as we apply place builder, it is an avenue for us to condense the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan into understandable or discernible development criteria that an applicant can strive to meet. So the first step in using the place builder is for us to identify what place type. The applicant did choose the enhanced neighborhood place type. And then the second step is to identify a particular development type. And the applicant identified low density residential as their proposed development type. And then the third step of that process is to identify a proposed zone. So the applicant chose a zone that is not listed in the comprehensive plan, which is okay. So the existing zoning here, R1D, as well as the proposed zone, M1P, are not listed as recommended zones in the adopted comprehensive plan. But the applicant is able to choose a different zone within our zoning ordinance and then explain why that zone is their particular request. So in this case, the applicant identified the M1P zone, and although it's not listed here, they noted that it was compatible with the existing development to the west, and it would allow for expansion of the mobile home park in the same pattern of development and generally the same density. And these are just snapshots from the comprehensive plan. So the applicant in proposing this, it was reviewed by the Planning Commission and the staff. The staff did make a recommendation of approval of the zone change as well as the development plan, And the Planning Commission held a lengthy public hearing related to that, as well as this proposed low-density development on their proposed preliminary development plan. So you can see on the preliminary development plan the applicant shows an entrance point off Price Road Local streets that connect to the existing Stub streets into the st. Martin's Village neighborhood as well as a stub Street into their existing mobile home park And again, this is 52 dwelling units or mobile home sites as well as a community center a a long price road, basketball court, and other amenities, playground, and a dog park somewhere in here. There we go. And then a maintenance structure. So the applicant with this proposal equated to about 6.6 dwelling units per acre for the mobile home park. the planning commission did hold a lengthy public hearing on august 22nd it was over three hours and there was quite a bit of opposition expressed both here in the council chambers and then we moved to the phoenix building for the remainder of the hearing and so i noted that there were 23 citizens that spoke in opposition to the request so staff presented the findings of the application was in compliance with the adopted comprehensive plan. The applicant explained their proposal to expand the mobile home park and the need for the zone change. And then the bulk of our hearing was focused on the citizen comment time. So I would say that in summary, the four biggest points of concern were connectivity to the adjoining St. Martin's Village and not wanting those streets to connect protection of the existing character of the neighborhood. St. Martin's Village obviously has been there quite a long time, and they are not interested in any connection to the adjoining or the new neighboring Oval Home Park. There was identified some interest or concern about potential crime, and then the traffic, of course. So the Planning Commission, after reviewing the evidence and the information testimony that was received, also understood that the connectivity was really the largest concern of those who attended the meeting that evening, and they voted to amend the proposed findings that the staff provided. And in doing so, they removed any information about connectivity. So although the comprehensive plan recommends connectivity, the planning commission felt it was important not to recommend the connections in this case, and they amended the findings from the planning staff to delete three findings related to connectivity. And then in doing that their next step was to consider the plan associated with the Application and so I'm sorry this one's not in color, but it is the the signed version The Planning Commission made a recommendation here That the termination of the stub streets into st. Martin's Village Will be determined at the time of the final development plan and really what they meant was was we don't want those to connect, so when you come back for your final development plan, you're going to have to make another plan for that. And so at this stage, to get the preliminary development plan signed, the applicant added the note about reconsideration of St. Martin's Village connectivity, and then they provided a gap in the road just for ease of getting the plan certified, but they understand the intent of the Planning Commission in making that decision was to send a message to the applicant that they were to rethink the design of their roads through this area and consider how the street network could be built without connecting to the adjoining subdivision. So they were very clear in their recommendation about the connectivity. So again, the Planning Commission expressed concern. then they approved the associated development plan with a new requirement that the three stub streets be terminated at the next stage, not connect, right? And the planning commission then voted with those changes to recommend to the urban county council approval of the M1P zone with a vote of 7 to 1 that evening. So let's go through the findings just briefly to kind of wrap up my presentation. The Planning Commission recommended approval, and they found that it was the M1P zone to be in agreement with the Comprehensive Plan's goals and objectives for three reasons. The proposal would increase the overall density of the site, considering today it only holds one single-family home. Almost any new development on this site would increase the density. The proposal provides housing that addresses the demand for low- and medium-income individuals. and then also the request provides for additional green space and new community recreation amenities on site. Secondly, the planning commission found that the proposal is in agreement with the following policies of the comprehensive plan. The internal circulation network promotes pedestrian-friendly street pattern and design. It's a bit of a grid. The expansion of the existing mobile home park increases density in a manner that is consistent with low-density residential character within the area. And then third, the request provides housing opportunities for lower and middle income individuals. And then in relation to the development criteria, and this is where we saw the change to the findings, there were four reasons that the Planning Commission found that it was consistent with the development criteria associated with the enhanced neighborhood low density development pattern. So the proposed rezoning meets criteria for land use because the request increases density and increases the number of dwelling units on the parcel, creates a safer, more accessible neighborhood through expansion of pedestrian facilities. Proposed rezoning meets the criteria for the environmental sustainability and resiliency because there's not any impact to environmentally sensitive areas here. The request meets the requirements for site design. It provides an increase in the neighborhood recreation space and amenities. And then lastly, the request meets the criteria for building form as the proposed development utilizes sidewalks and landscaping to provide a development that creates pedestrian-friendly atmosphere. So you can sense from these findings that the Planning Commission liked the pedestrian connectivity of the area and also liked the increased density and different development opportunities or varied housing types and the potential to serve a low and moderate income level. And so that was the gist of their recommendation to you and why they recommended approval. And again, this is the development plan that the planning director signed on behalf of the planning commission, which does remove the connections here. Let me go through that. So the red spots are the ones that are going to be removed. There won't be a connection there. They'll redesign that. But there was proposed to remain a connection from the existing mobile home park. So at this point, I will see if there's any questions or cross-examination, I guess. Thank you, Ms. Wade. Does the petitioner at this time, would you like to cross-examine planning staff? No, thank you. Would the opposition like to cross-examine planning staff? No, thank you very much. All right, next up is the presentation from the petitioner. Welcome. Good evening. Nick Nicholson here on behalf of the applicant. You'll hear me refer to it as Flagstone, or excuse me, Flagship Communities. The property owner technically is Fayette MHC, but Flagship is the kind of corporate kind of entity that operates and kind of runs all these facilities. Andrew Pulliam with Flagship is supposed to be here. He had some babysitter issues, and so he's a little bit delayed, but hopefully he will be here soon. and also Brock McKay with Vioxx and Vioxx will be here and we're happy to answer any questions that you all may have kind of throughout this process. We are in complete agreement with the staff and the Planning Commission's recommendation to you all, especially the conditions of approval and more specifically with regards to eliminating the connections as shown on the final development plan that Ms. Wade just kind of went over. Those connections were actually requested by the applicant to be eliminated at the end of the hearing, after hearing from the neighborhood and how kind of fervent they were with regards to the desire to basically not have the kind of interconnectivity into their established neighborhood, to not try to do anything to jeopardize that culture. and we were more than happy to kind of abide by that. We have since also affirmed that part of this termination, we're going to work with them on what they would prefer for that kind of termination design to look like, whether we close the right-of-ways, whether we do some type of cul-de-sac. We're just happy to kind of do whatever the neighborhood would like to do in that regards. But more specifically, any of the termination that we are talking about will include a six-foot landscaping berm entirely around any kind of the street connections in order to ensure that the neighborhood is fully screened from the expansion of the Suburban Point mobile home park. I think Ms. Wade already did an excellent job walking through why we believe that this plan is in compliance with the comprehensive plan. Even though Place Builder is silent towards the M1P zone, at the time that this was actually filed, it was silent to a lot of zones. For example, the B3 zone, which is the most prominent commercial zone that Lexington has, is not mentioned in Place Builder in any location. It's just kind of how Place Builder works. There's recommended zones, but you do not have to select that recommended zones. You then look to the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, similar to how we did before Place Builder, with regards to justifying your request. And at the core of this request it is basically attempting to solve a major city infrastructure issue while bringing in 52 affordable housing units and also doing it in a manner that is respectful for this existing neighborhood in the ways that I just described. The city infrastructure issue that we are talking about here and actually this entire zone change request actually kind of started with LFUCG. There is a failing pump station in this area that is required to be upgraded or taken offline by the consent decree. There are significant sanitary sewer overflows in this area because of this pump station. And so the Department of Water Quality contacted the property owner. This parcel is actually connected already to one of the parcels that has the existing suburban point. It's just a split zoned parcel. And so they contacted us to acquire an easement to bring a gravity line sewer across this property and through the existing park in order to take that pump station offline. We were more than happy to work with them. At that time it kind of spurred, okay, what are we doing with this existing 16 acre kind of plot of land? And as you'll see, as I kind of explain what Flagship kind of is and their kind of facilities, always wanted to really add to the amenity in open space areas for this particular park. Since it was built in the kind of 50s and 60s, you'll see how close together some of the existing lots are and how lack or how there's not that much type of amenity areas. So this gave us an opportunity at a very low density to be able to expand the amenity packages for this area in this community. With the 16 acres, we're only proposing a density of 3.15, which is actually lower than the St. Martin's Village that is adjacent to us. Now, there are a lot of misconceptions about this type of use and also this property, and I think a lot of it is because of the former owner of this facility and also the kind of perception that we all have of what a mobile home park looks like, as opposed to what the the manufactured houses of today look like, because this type of industry has really revolutionized based on a lot of the criticism that it was getting in the kind of 80s and 90s, and we'll kind of walk through what a manufactured house actually now looks like. To introduce you all to Flagship, this is a Kentucky company. It is started in Northern Kentucky about 30 years ago. Right now, let's see, they have approximately 69 communities with over 12,000 home sites throughout the Midwest. It is still a Kentucky-based company, and it is basically received several local, state, and national awards that are based on improving these types of aging mobile home parks, the benefits to the community that it has, and even the workplace of Flagship itself. So Suburban Point was purchased at basically it kind of right at the end of 21, they kind of took over operations in January of 22. And within one year, it actually received Kentucky's highest award for manufactured homes. And then the following year, Flagship actually received the nation's highest award with regards to the Manufacturing House Institute Award for the Community Operator of the Year because of the improvements that it made to Suburban Point specifically in just those two-year periods. Since that time, to kind of read a list of all the infrastructure improvements that they have already taken place, they have repaved every single road in the existing facility. They installed a new water monitoring system, which led them to be able to fix over 50 broken or faulty systems that led to the immediate reduction of the cost of water for every single resident of Suburban Point by 30%. They've added a new clubhouse and gathering space. They added a new amenity area. They installed solar lighting on every single street light that is in Suburban Point. They've also improved the quality of the units that were able to be placed inside Suburban Point, which I am going to talk about. They've also started all of the list of the kind of community programs that I have listed there that all are designed to get at the health and safety of their residents with a primary focus to make sure that the kids of Suburban Point are healthy, they are fed, and they have all the supplies that they need when they go to school to become successful. To kind of walk you through, this is what Suburban Point looked like when they purchased it in the kind of beginning of 22. Here's all of the improvements they have already made to the road system and also you'll see the upgrade in the type of units. This is the community center that they installed that is already that they're going to provide another basically community center as part of this development. And here are the amenities. So one of the reasons why Flagship is so successful in turning around these types of facilities is because they recognize that they are acting as a city. They have to install amenities that are municipal grade that you would see in any type of city park. You can't just have a neighborhood HOA. You have to build above and beyond what you think the demand is going to be. because at the end of the day, none of this is under kind of lock and key, like in an apartment facility or apartment pool with key fobs. It's a recognition that all the kids in the area will actually end up coming to kind of utilize this area because they are so kind of above and beyond what you would normally expect out of just a HOA facility. community. Here are ones that are actually in Suburban Point already that we have installed. So you can see that same type of facility and this same type of amenity package is being proposed on the existing side. Here is the specific proposed community building. This is one that exists on another site, but is the exact same type of unit that will be basically proposed to be installed that's shown on the development plan. The reason why we kind of oversized this is because the community events are very important to flagship. We regularly have multiple different holiday parties. We have back-to-school, basically, supply sales. We have basically free lunches for the children whenever school is out of session. And so the community center does act as a gathering place for our residents. Now, this is the kind of typical manufactured home that is now kind of being built. As you will kind of see, this is all designed around energy efficiency. Right now, we have basically see anywhere between 20 to 30 percent of a reduction of utilities because of how much energy efficiency goes into the design and build of these manufactured homes. We look at different type of ductwork, insulation, windows, lighting, and appliances, all are made with energy efficiency in mind. And also, when you are dealing with the type of facility that is kind of creating these manufactured homes, it has a lot less of an energy impact to the, basically, to the surrounding areas because of the reduction of carbon footprint that you would see when you are kind of taking a kind of full neighborhood and trying to build it from scratch on a greenfield site. And that is why we're able to basically capture these kind of 20 to 30 percent energy efficiency savings throughout Suburban Point. And this is just kind of a very general slide that kind of gets at why these type of facilities will be a benefit in this area. This is a 16-acre infill site that is a greenfield right now. And what we are able to do is be able to make it a private site where Lexington gets the benefit from the tax base, but does not get the burden from any type of the maintenance because we actually own and control the roads and have to actually maintain them moving forward. And that goes without saying that this is a true kind of affordable housing workforce housing type project. These are the kind of the numbers that will show exactly what we're talking about. If you look at the purchase prices at the top right corner, this is the only type of use that you would be able to get this type of purchase price in Fayette County. We all know what we have seen in news since COVID about with regards to how much the median houses are looking at and how much the rental increases have occurred in just short order. What we basically showed is that when you basically buy one of these units, it typically is a 15 to 20 year mortgage. And so we combined the actual mortgage payment, the interest costs, the taxes, and the insurance, as well as the rent space for the individual 52 units. And all of that combined is still less than what you are seeing in the rental units, and it's certainly substantially less, a third of the kind of cost of the type of single-family housing that is on the market today. So this is absolutely directed at workforce and affordable housing because it's necessary. And what we are able to kind of get at is I did not know kind of how this market works prior to kind of getting involved in this case. What typically we will see with our customers is that they will pay off the mortgage within the 15 to 20 year kind of range. And then they used the unit as collateral to buy land in kind of the surrounding counties and move the unit to those surrounding counties. One of the points on the manufactured homes that I did want to bring up in the changes is that the industry really responded to the issues that were very prevalent with regards to when a unit set for too long, that the chassis would break, that they wouldn't be able to move it, and somebody would be stuck in a place that maybe they couldn't afford the rent anymore, but they also couldn't move the house that they had paid for. And so these are designed with specifically that in mind, that you can pick these up and move, and it's actually very, very common. What also is common is the amount of resales that occur, that you actually have a lot of buy and sales of these type of units once they're actually established in an area. And you're able to pick them up and you're able to move them. But what the key is, is you're able to actually capture equity. So you are paying off the mortgage, you are paying the interest, and you can resell just like you would any other house. And you are able to capture that equity. And so this is offering true home ownership opportunity, albeit with a rental component of it. But that's the only way you were able to actually get these types of prices. Ms. Wade kind of already went over the area in question, but this is kind of, I wanted to overlay it in this manner so you all kind of could see how it actually connects into the neighborhood, and then kind of zoom in on the plan itself. As she showed, we are proposing to be able to put in, I always forget this, Soccer fields, we're proposing two different half court basketball courts. We're proposing a dog park right here. And also that is the new kind of community center that I kind of highlighted right there. All of this is designed in order to upgrade the existing facilities, because you really can see how tight the kind of existing uses are in comparison to what the lotting scheme is that we are proposing. We are proposing the typical lot that we're showing here is 5,000 square feet. That is right in between what the minimums are for R1D, which is 6,000, and R1E, which is 4,000. We are trying everything we possibly could to not try to add too much density, knowing full well that we are abutting an existing established neighborhood. We are less dense than St. Martin's, and we are trying to match the actual lotting pattern by establishing the kind of 5,000 square foot lots and trying to max out open space and amenities as opposed to trying to max out our density. I think the only thing I wanted to kind of point out as well is that we try to design the roads to focus on traffic calming. I think a lot of that concern kind of goes away knowing that we are basically preventing the connections into the St. Martin's neighborhood. But at the end of the day, we wanted to design a system where it did not make sense that you would see a lot of cut-through traffic. But by eliminating the connections, I think we've kind of taken care of that concern entirely. Again, we are proposing to buffer every connection, every kind of property line that will be with the St. Mayer's neighborhood in order to make sure that they remain protected, in order to make sure that that character does remain without negligible impact, knowing full well that we are creeping closer to them. However, this is a 16-acre infill site that Lexington needs to have developed, especially considering what the benefit the city is getting from the pump station infrastructure and the affordable housing perspective. I'm happy to answer any questions if you all have them, but I can also wait until after. Thank you, Mr. Nicholson. Does the opposition have, would like to cross-examine the petitioner? All right, Mr. Simpson, you got five minutes. Five minutes? Yes, sir. We had 20. You have 20 minutes for your presentation. This is cross-examination. Okay, no, no, no. Okay. Okay, thank you. Okay, so Mr. Simpson, you're ready for your presentation then? Okay. I'm sorry. That's okay. Please proceed. You got 20 minutes. Thank you. Actually, before I do that, just making sure planning staff like to cross-examine petitioner. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Simpson, you can proceed. Thank you, Vice Mayor and members of the council. My name is Bruce Simpson, and I'm privileged to represent St. Martin's Village. And because some of the folks are almost catching up to me in age, I promise them in case they started to nod off, which I hope I don't. I would ask them to stand up, all the folks that are here tonight in support of St. Martin's Village and against approval of this zone change to stand at this time, please. I'm sure there's folks standing out in the mezzanine. Thank you all. Appreciate it. Vice Mayor, members of the council, as I shared with the Planning Commission, that this case and another one you'll be getting probably next month are two really important cases for you and two really important cases for this community. I have learned a lot in this case that I never knew before. I've been doing these cases since 1988. The biggest thing I've learned is what a neighborhood is that I never had the privilege of experiencing. I've asked St. Martin's Village when I first met them and they explained to When I first met them, they explained to me the history and they said, well Bruce, you know, we started in 1955 because this was the first relatively upscale, middle to upper class, middle to upper middle class subdivision for African Americans because we couldn't live anywhere else in Lexington. Ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate your enthusiasm and support, but in the chambers there's to be no expressions of that sort. Thank you. I appreciate it. And I continued my inquiry just to get an understanding. I said, well, okay, I understand that, but, you know, that was 69 years ago. Those deed restrictions that precluded African Americans from living in the South and elsewhere in our community for the most part were struck down a number of years ago. And so, why did you stay? Why did you stay? And the overwhelming response that I've obtained, which I've never witnessed in either neighborhood that I've lived in. The village is composed of a large family. That's why all these people are here tonight. It is more than just a color on the map. It's more than just a development plan. It's more than just one of the pages in our 700-800 page comprehensive land use plan and it's more than just planning theory. These are real connections with real people who had nowhere else to go in 1955. As indicated in the Herald Eater article in April of 1955, Indicated in the Herald Eater article in April of 1955, construction to start in new subdivision, permits for the construction of three houses in St. Martin's Village, new subdivision for Negroes were granted yesterday to St. Martin's Village. Of course, we wouldn't see that type of headline today, fortunately, but it reflected the time. Well, okay, so African Americans can have a nicer subdivision. And then what they put next to it? Mobile Home Park. I'm sure the representatives of Mobile Home Park at that time advertised that they were going to have a nice mobile home park and it was going to be all these wonderful amenities and do all these wonderful things, which of course every applicant puts on a good front when they're trying to get permission to do something that people kind of pause and think, really, a mobile home park? Because, you know, as lawyers, that's what we do, and Mr. Nicholson is one of the best. And we can try to change the nomenclature and change the verbiage and talk about a new style of homes and different amenities and that sort of thing. The stigma is still there. Still there. We all know it. Let's be real when we're talking about it. I don't know honestly if you would find a realtor in Lexington who would go show you a new subdivision to live in, would direct you to a subdivision next to a mobile home park. They're just, people are going to blink. Let's just be honest with ourselves. It shouldn't be that way. We shouldn't have any differences about where people live. I believe that. We shouldn't. But we have a culture and perception of things that we can say that's not right, but when it comes to making our personal decisions, we're going to make our personal decisions, which may not be consistent with what we say we ought to believe. Let's be real. Let's be real about this case. In particular, let's be real about this. There is no dispute in the comprehensive plan that is before you tonight to guide your decision. A plan that took five years to research, analyze, compartmentalize, redraw, recolor, retable, vet in the community. hearings, you all spent numerous, numerous hours in reviewing the only part that you all have any real say-so on, goals and objectives. In all of that last five years that's been undertaken in research and inviting neighbors to come in and offer what they'd like to see Lexington be and how to grow and where things ought to be and services and changing house styles and all these wonderful ideas and brainstorming. There is not one reference in any of the goals and objectives that you all adopted after hearing from all of your constituents and others. Not one reference about expanding mobile home parks. Not one. There wasn't any outreach to St. Martin's Village. We're thinking about expanding the mobile home park on land that's zoned single family just like yours. Comp plan says you're supposed to do that. You're supposed to have outreach and educate the public like we've got a new kind of mobile home park. We're going to call it manufactured housing. And we want you to think about how would you like it if we put it over here where these lots are zoned for single family like yours. What about changing it for those new manufactured houses? What would your reaction be so we can put that in the comp plan, put it in the goals and objectives so that people that have invested generations in St. Martin's Village, generations of families that have stayed there would have some appreciation there's a change coming. There wasn't any notice, there wasn't any forecasting that this change was coming. It's come out of nowhere and no basis in the comp plan. As the staff has indicated to you, the zoning that's being selected in this zone change is not recommended for this property. Now, that's undisputed fact. It's not in the comprehensive plan as a recommended zone. Why? Now, Mr. Nicholson said, well, there's other recommended zones, other zones that aren't recommended for other kind of land uses. And that's true. But where is there any recommendation? There's a recommendation for commercial development and all the other zones that he mentioned. There's recommendations for those uses. Where's a recommendation specifically for an expansion of mobile home parks or more mobile home parks? Let's add some new ones someplace. None. So when you look at the comprehensive plan, are you in compliance? No, you can't be. It's not a recommended zone to start with. Clearly you can't be in compliance with that. In addition, the number one goal and objective in every comprehensive plan is to preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods. And as I learned from St. Martin's Village, Bruce explained to me, taking both sides as lawyers do, how this expansion of the mobile home park that we've had to deal with the nuisances for decades, that they're now saying they're going to clean up and be nice and pretty, how does that enhance St. Martin's Village where we had to live and didn't have a choice? How does that enhance us as an existing neighborhood? Now I'd like to think I'm a pretty good lawyer sometimes. Sometimes a blind hog gets an acorn every now and then. But I, I confess I struggled to come up with a cogent argument that was persuasive of how this was going to enhance their neighborhood. American neighborhoods are in jeopardy in our community. They're in jeopardy. Now, there's no historic designation, but there doesn't need to be. These people are living history of what happened in 1955 and has continued to this day. They stayed together because they are family, because it was safe, they protected one another, they looked after one another and they've not chosen to leave even though they could. That's a rare, I submit to you, I had a hard time getting into that myself because, you know, let's be real, I got a different filter at the way I look at things than the people that grew up and lived through Jim Crow in St. Martin's Village. A different filter, different reaction. I I don't feel things the same way. I can't. I can try to be empathetic, but there's limitations. And this is a neighborhood of people and memories and history that no comprehensive plan can adequately define or articulate. And yet, four years ago, in October, the mayor appointed an equity racial justice task force to say we need to look into these issues and start protecting neighborhoods like this, African American neighborhoods. And be sensitive. And it doesn't necessarily require zone change or historic overlay, but how about preserve and enhance and actually do something about it, be meaningful about that language that's been in every comprehensive plan since at least 88. Preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods. They're there first. They have reasonable expectations of what's coming next to them. They ought to be informed ahead of time to participate, to offer rebuttal about changing the comprehensive plan. That didn't happen here. There was no change to encourage and recommend more mobile home park. None. No telegraphing this is coming. And no recommendation for that zone to be anywhere in Fayette County. That is just an undisputed fact. So when you're looking at the comprehensive plan for compliance, you can't. It doesn't comply. I've set all these particular provisions out under theme A specifically in my findings that I submitted to the Planning Commission. They have been introduced here today and I rely upon all those specific points in terms of non-compliance with a comprehensive plan. Now much has been said, one more thing, well much has been said about affordable housing workforce development. These are the current buzz words for development. I've said them, you know, when I'm representing a developer, I'll probably say them again, you know, you'll hear them from me. And that's okay, and that's good, because we do need workforce housing. We do need affordable housing. But is this the kind of affordable housing that you all want to set as a benchmark, this kind of experiment, if you will? It's an experiment. We're changing mobile home parks to manufacture homes, and it's going to be a different look and a new way of living in mobile home parks. But is this the kind of quote unquote affordable housing that you want to encourage? So they pay whatever they pay, $100,000, $130,000, $80,000. Most of the mobile home park owners, they finance the acquisition of the company so they can make money that way. And I don't begrudge them for making the money. My point is this. They put a veneer on this as if it's home ownership. I mean, let's be real when we're talking about really important matters. They own the mobile home, but they don't own the land. They rent the land. They have to pay mortgage for the mobile home, and then they've got to pay rent to the mobile home park owner. And then, because these are going to be private streets, 30 feet wide instead of 50, which are public streets, Guess who's going to pay for maintenance of those private streets? Who's going to pay money into a road fund through increased rent to maintain these private streets? The people that are living in so-called affordable or workforce housing. They're paying mortgage on the mobile home, rent to the landlord, and paying for maintenance of the private streets. And we've heard about free lunches, really. I suggest there's no free lunch. And so what it comes down to in this case is the comp plan is not being complied with. I mean, it's just abundantly clear. Nobody's informed the neighbors. The zoning that's being used is not recommended. How can you say you're recommended to comply with the plan when the zoning ordinance itself says it doesn't belong here? How does that get left out of 700 pages? Oops. Just made a mistake. We recommended commercial and office and residential elsewhere, but we didn't recommend mobile home park, but you can use it anyway. We didn't talk about it in the goals and objectives. The council never talked about it. We never talked about it in a public meeting, but make a pitch, say you're going to have a new way of doing mobile homes, and we'll approve it in a zone change. I suggest to you that's not a good policy provision to adopt as a matter of course. It is not fair to St. Martin's Village, which has had to endure, all it has had to endure and still preserve the integrity of its neighborhood, far more than the homes that they have maintained in such a beautiful condition. They've maintained a community that shines by itself as a model. I spent a lot of time with these people. And they have earned the right to be respected and have their neighborhood preserved. And I ask that you do that. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Does the planning staff at this time want to cross examine the opposition? All right, Ms. Waite, you'll have five minutes. So in the adopted comprehensive plan, Mr. Simpson references just a kind of a generic goal or objective that's been part of the comprehensive plan since 1988. And I just want him to point to where that is in the comprehensive plan that's been adopted in 2023. particular goal and objectives preserve and enhance existing neighborhood speaks for itself well except if it's not part of the adopted goals and objectives under let's see i think that's kind of an overarching topic well it's it's the title of the theme right That's not a part of the comprehensive plan? Preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods? That's not what it says. Theme A is growing and sustaining successful neighborhoods. Okay, same thing. Same thing. I'm trying to figure out what goal or objective is pointing to. That speaks for itself. Goals and objectives are very general. As you know, they're supposed to be. They're aspirational. The comprehensive plan talks about context sensitivity. Due deference to the neighborhood. I don't need a lecture. I'm just trying to figure out which goal or objective you are pointing to. I've given you all those goals and objectives in my findings, the specific ones. I can pull out the findings. Ms. Jones has those. The only finding related to the goals or objectives actually refers, or the comprehensive plan in general, refers back to design policies for 8 and 12 of Theme A, which is Pillar 1 design. One of those has to do with contact sensitivity, Policy 4. Policy 8 has to do with varied housing choice, which the applicant is proposing. And then Policy 12, which you reference here, actually says include commercial development in your design, which doesn't appear to be relevant. Contact sensitivity is at the core and centerpiece of this. Again, I'm just trying to clarify what portions of the comprehensive plan you're referring to. If you can show me anywhere in there that says trailer parks or mobile home parks are to be included, I'll withdraw my objection. That wasn't my question. And you can't find it because it is not in there and you all wrote it. That's not the point. It is the point. It is exactly the point. All right, Ms. Wade, are you finished? Thank you. Would the petitioner like to cross-examine opposition? Okay. Thank you very much. That's all of our presentations. We're a little bit over an hour in. Next up is public comment. We do have quite a few people signed up, so I'm going to propose that we take, let's say, a seven-minute break and be back here at 715. I don't want to keep people out any later than I need to. So we'll be reconvening at 7.15. Thank you all very much. Thank you. All right, ladies and gentlemen, thank you all very much. Let's everybody please find a seat. And I'll reiterate again, if you can't find a seat here in the chambers, we have additional seating out in the mezzanine in the overflow area. So I'm going to call us back to order. and so here's how public comment's gonna go. We have a number of people signed up. I'm gonna call your name. When I do, please come up to the podium, tell us your name one more time and your district, your council district for the record, and then you'll have three minutes to speak. If you've yielded your time to someone, I will note that as well, and I will also note the two people that are coming up after you because we do have folks in overflow and there's a little bit of a lag on the video. So this way the second or third person can make their way into the chambers and be ready to speak when the first person is done. All right. So without further ado, first up is Doyle Warren, followed by Artie Green, followed by Michelle Davis. So if I can have Doyle Warren to the podium, and then lined up will be Artie Green and then Michelle Davis. All right, we're going to go on to Artie Green. Are you here? Yes. All right, come on up please. And after Artie Green will be Michelle Davis, followed by Rosemary Owens. Thank you. Vice Mayor and Council Members, Artie Green, 2nd District. The reason why we're here tonight, as far as I'm concerned, is we're here against this zone change. The reason why we're against this zone change is because we know we're trying to protect the unique nature of our community that has been here for 7 years. Most of the folks here are friends and family. And people that we've grown up with. We'd like to continue to protect the nature of our neighborhood by restricting all the traffic that the openings of that sort of thing might cause. We want to continue to grow our family and our investment after 70 years of struggle and work of trying to put these houses together. We literally have people in our community to help build those houses. And the zone change and expanding the trailer park will have some impact on us negatively. because the boundaries are so close to where we are that we won't have any control over those. That's private property over there. So I ask that you will hear our plea here and deny this don't change. Thank you. Thank you very much. Up next is Michelle Davis, followed by Rosemary Owens, and then Ann Green. Council members, My name is Michelle Davis and I'm in the 1st District. I'm the president of St. Martin's Village Neighborhood Association. I live at 940 Depores Avenue. I've lived there for 67 years in my parents' house. St. Martin's Village as you all know was built in 1955. It was the first black subdivision. My parents, my father worked at Bluegrass Army Depot. My mother was a homemaker. It was the only subdivision in Lexington that allowed my parents the opportunity to purchase a house. During that time everything was segregated. I even went to Douglas Elementary School on Price Road where I attended first through sixth grade. My parents were very, very proud of their home and since their death I've lived in that house with my family. I raised my daughter, my granddaughter, my great granddaughter. My house will be passed down from generation to generation. St. Martin's Village, as we call it, the village, has been a safe place to live and to raise a family. The neighbors are my extended family. This is my community because my parents and the children were my babysitters. When my mother was sick, my neighbors helped drive her to the doctor's office, to her appointments, and they helped prepare food for us to eat. This is back in the 70s. When my mother passed, my neighbors were there to comfort me. My neighbors were my second parents. Growing up in this neighborhood where we had teachers, principals, ministers, police officers, lawyers, doctors, nurses, military officers, government workers, council members, We were respected by our families, the village, and the community. If I was in trouble in school by my teachers, I knew when I got home that I was in trouble with my mother because everybody in that neighborhood knew everybody. I was the only child, and it was very important for me to have children my age to play with. Whatever house I was over, my mother would always remind me I need to be home before it got dark or the street lights came on. I was always over somebody's house. When my friends' family would visit during the summer, that meant a lot to me because I had other kids that I could play with. I enjoyed the time with my neighbors' families and maintained those friendships into adulthood. We are a very close-knit community. As you can see, the characteristics of our subdivision have to be preserved for years. We need this zone change to remain as St. Martin's Village Neighborhood Association's single resident homes. The trailer module homes are not affordable and the owners do not own their own property. We would like to have barriers or buffers installed to keep noises out from the homes in St. Martin's Village. Thank you, Ms. Davis. Sorry, your time is. Okay, I'm just about finished. Okay. I know, but I'm at the very end of it, just if you let me just finish this. We would like to have barriers and buffers installed to keep the noise out because of the homes in St. Martin's Village will be 20 feet from the property line behind our neighbor's home. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Rosemary Owens, followed by Ann Green, and then Carol Leith. Welcome. I'm Rosemary Owens, and I reside at 973 Waverly Drive. Back in 1962, I came from Pikeville, Kentucky, and to attend St. Joseph's School of Nursing. And I left to go back to the mountains and worked at the Miner's Hospital for a year to pay homage to family that worked in the coal fields. My father was a combat World War II soldier, the Buffalo soldier, and then combat over in the Pacific, and came back later to, excuse me, hometown as a sergeant. So when I did get out of nurses training at St. Joseph School of Nursing, the second and last black of St. Joseph School of Nursing Charities affiliation, there was really no place to live comfortably. Therefore my father said, we'll find a place. And thanks to Mr. Al Gilchrist, a realtor here in Lexington, he found the home. We went to Oakwood and then we went to St. Martin's. And this is where I have been. I have just turned 80 years old and I've been there for the past 65 years. My sister came down. She was able to live in the house. attended KSU. My brother came and he was able to live in the house after he finished at KSU. The people in St. Martin's was like a village to us coming from Eastern Kentucky and we strive to do better with our education which we did. And I tell you, this community has so many, many talented people and professionals, and I am just really proud to have met so many of them. So I do oppose this zone change and I thank you for your time. Thank you. Next up is Ann Green, followed by Carol Leith and then Andre Wilson. And as a reminder, please say your name and council district, and you'll have three minutes. Good evening. I am Ann Chambers Green. I live on Erie Road along with my husband Sherman Green. We have lived there over 60 years. Our three daughters grew up there. I am 91 years old, and my husband is 95. We are the oldest residents on Erie Road. I am here to voice my objection to the proposed change in our community. As you all know, St. Martin Village is the oldest subdivision built for people of color. At that time we could not buy a house in any other areas of the city. We were unwelcome there and sometimes I wonder if we're welcome there now. Sorry. We are a close-knit community. We have a rich heritage. Coming from our neighborhood have been doctors, nurses, social workers, dentists, lawyers, ministers, teachers, law professors, firemen, contractors, brick and stone masons. and most of those brick and stone masons have helped to build buildings here in the city. And their children and grandchildren still live in some of the homes. If our streets are open up to compromise this trailer park, it will be more traffic, noise all hours of the night. Our streets are narrow as it is. We have never had a problem with emergency vehicles coming and going. We are doing just fine. If I understood the representative from the trailer court, they said they don't need to do, they could do without opening up our streets. So if they can, why are they doing it? And we're not benefiting from the trailer court in any shape, form or fashion. So, I just have one question that I want to ask you. How many of you would welcome a trailer court in your backyards? Don't answer it because I already know. So, I want to say, as it is the most of all that the history is bad, that the historical black neighborhoods have been compromised. We've been boxed in and forced out for so-called improvements. Thank you, Ms. Green. Is St. Martin Village going to be the next? So I'm here to bitterly object any disruption in our community. We don't need it. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Green. Next up is Carol Leith, followed by Andre Wilson and then Reginald Thomas. My name is Carol Leith. I'm 70 years old. moved to St. Martin's Village a week before my 10th birthday. Very happy to have been there. Loved the experience, the fellowship, and the beauty of living in this neighborhood. I came here today wanting to hear, because I know some of the people that live in the trailer park. So I wanted to hear what he had to say. and it was like going to one of those timeshare things. It was like you was trying to sell it to us. We already got a place to stay. We don't, the improvements that you mentioned sound wonderful. Take them out in Hamburg. We don't need any more. It's too close as it is. We worked too hard to have our neighborhood, to have something that belongs to us, that we can take pride in, that we grew up with and in. The trailer park and the village don't mix. Never did. Not going to. That basketball court and all that looks nice. They'll love it in Hamburg. We don't need any more expansion off of Price's Road in any of the area. We don't want the village to be the next highlight where you've got, true enough, these people need a place to be, but not here. Let us have something. That's all. I'm not going to say anything. Thank you very much. Next up is Andre Wilson, followed by Reginald Thomas, and then Robin Connor. And just if you'll bear with me for a second, I'm going to seem like that guy that's going to be cutting you off at the end when your time hits. And I'll tell you why I do that. It's for a sense of fairness, because I don't pick and choose who gets more time or less time when that time hits. It's about respecting everybody else who's going to speak after you. So if you all can do your best to adhere to that time, I would really, really appreciate that. And also please address your comments to us here on the council. Go ahead, please. Thank you, sir. I want to thank you, Vice Mayor and the councilman, for giving me this opportunity to direct y'all. I'm just here to support St. Martin Village and neighborhood and the community. I was a kid that grew up in the projects, single parent, welfare, roaches, everything negativity. And St. Martin Village is one of those other visions that gave black kids like me hope to show that you can bring your child out of the projects and build a better life for them. And here at the Hole, years later, I didn't think that I was going to have the opportunity to meet these great people. I didn't think I was going to have the opportunity to move in St. Martin Village. I could have moved anywhere. I got a big construction business where I've worked for most of the biggest builders in the state of Kentucky in the country. But I had Mr. People come to me and say, we got this one house on Lima Court in 1999, and we think that would be a fit for you because of the community work you do, and of you turning your life around, coming out of prison and giving back to the community. and I thought about it, and after I heard about the richness of and all the pride that St. Martin Village got, I said, okay, and like I said, I built and worked in Andover, Paloma, Hamburg, Richmond, Kentucky, for sale, Georgetown, but I wouldn't trade nothing for St. Martin Village. You know, some of the greatest people that you ever want to meet. I enjoy when I go to the neighborhood association. They come together. Like I said, I don't know a whole lot about the history and the zoning because I'm going to do a whole lot of other activists, gun violence, gun task force. But I know that if my community feel that this is wrong for them, I'm going to fight with them. You know, I'm going to stand with y'all. you know, because I know that a lot of y'all have put y'all's dues in, you know, and y'all have opened the doors for me that I can have something and give something to my children and with my community active as work that I can give to other people that I've mentored to. And I appreciate y'all giving me the opportunity. Thank you very much. Next up is Reginald Thomas followed by Robin Connor and then Valerie Logan. Good evening, Vice Mayor Wu, members of City Council, Reginald Thomas, 3390 Pinnacle Parkway, District 8. I'm a son of St. Martin's Village. I want to say that first. Everything I learned about friendships, about teamwork, about going to church and putting God first in your life, about education and the benefits of education, and striving to be the best person you could be, I learned by growing up in St. Martin's Village. And that helped make me the man that I am today. I'm going to begin by saying, because I'm also a lawyer, that approval of this zone change would immediately put the urban county government out of compliance with your urban county conference of planning. Because as stated factually here by your own planning commission, that the MHP-1 zone was not part of the recommended zone plan for new development. So approval of this immediately puts you outside of your plan that you have adopted. But more than that, I also want to repeat what I think is equally important, because one of the core tenets of affordable housing is that you strive to build wealth among American people because we all know that the accretion of wealth begins with home ownership. And there's nothing these people in this suburban point would acquire to build wealth. They're buying personal property, paying a mortgage on it, which as indicated will somewhere be around $1,500 for which they would get no tax deduction because under the IRS code, you cannot get a tax deduction for personal property. You can't deduct those mortgage payments. Number two, in addition to that, they're paying rent on land that they don't own. So that's about another $1,000 that they're going to pay. In addition to that, it's been pointed out that they've got to pay for roads and private areas, plus they've got to pay their own utilities. So when you begin to do the numbers and do the math, you begin to see that their payments are about $3,000 or more a month. And the only person benefiting from that in their pocketbook are the developer, not the owners of those mobile homes. So I submit to you that this is not affordable housing. I submit to you that this has no benefit under the Urban County Conspiracy Plan. And I'll say one other thing in closing because I see my time running out. I think we have to acknowledge as our attorney did, Bruce Simpson, who made a very strong point. I'm going to finish my point here, that we would not have this issue if we were talking about somewhat sub-development on the south in the town. We've got to acknowledge that. And St. Martin's Village and its historical character should not be an exception and cannot be an exception to falling outside of the mobile home park. This neighborhood deserves to maintain its character, my spirit rule, And I ask and urge this council to comply with their own urban kind comprehensive plan. Thank you. Next up is Robin Connor, followed by Valerie Logan, and then Alva Mitchell Covington. Hi, I'm Robin Connor, and I give my time to my uncle, George Brown, state representative. Okay, thank you. Give me one second. George Brown is signed up a little bit later, but when he comes up, he'll have six minutes. Thank you. Next up is Valerie Logan, followed by Alva Mitchell Covington. Hello, my name is Valerie Logan and I'm representing my mother, Betty Logan. She's over there. She's an original St. Martin's Village person. She moved in right as they built like the first 10 or 15 homes. She's been there ever since. is not left and i'm here speaking on behalf of over 50 or 60 percent of st martin's village who still live there still have family there they have transferred their houses to their kids we're talking fifth and sixth generations of people in the same neighborhood half of those i've been there since we were little in first grade and they're still my friends they still there and it is a unique type of individual when I bring my kid in oh you a Logan oh I know your mother I know your father it's it's all set you know you have no problems in the neighborhood but when I think of st. Martin's Village and how Lexington sees them I see three words that stand out misunderstood neglected, and overlooked. From the beginning, we were misunderstood. We were just going to be put in the corner and that's where you're going to stay. We decided, our parents got together, they formed a neighborhood, a village, and they all worked together. Then in the 80s and 90s, when the drug scene came on, we were neglected. it. We needed help. We needed somebody to come in and help us. But we persevered and we got our neighborhood back. Now we're being overlooked. There's nothing growth, nothing. If you look at what the growth is, we didn't get new schools. We got bust. We didn't get new grocery stores. We didn't get new planning for new plumbing. We didn't get anything. So we've been overlooked. Now you want something from us. And then you're going to tell us, but if you give us this mobile home and we put all this beautification in theirs, we're still being overlooked. We've been asking for a new Douglas Park, a new pool, a new everything. It's still on hold. We haven't seen anything creative and new comes to say, here's St. Martin's Village. Here's a new area you can have. Here's an upgrade of your park or your areas or anything. Same goes for Oakwood. And we just had someone across the street from my mother try to do a sober living. And that's not what she wants when she steps out on her porch, that she wants to see. she would like to see Ms. Grimes there. But no, she's going to see five or six grown men who are out there doing whatever. That's not what we look for. Thank you, Ms. Logan. Appreciate it. Thank you. Is Barbara Rice here? Barbara Rice Tolbert, rather? Yes. I got you. So up next is Alva Mitchell Covington, and you'll have six minutes. after Ms. Covington will be Walter Gaffield and then Roland Wolford. Okay. Got it. Got it. Yes. Good evening. My name is Alva Mitchell-Clark Covington, and I'm a St. Martin villager, 479 Erie Road. My parents moved us to St. Martin Village, me and my siblings, to St. Martin Village when I was five years old. My father moved us from a two-bedroom shotgun house that he rented. We were thrilled about moving to St. Martin Village because, as many have stated before me, it was one of the few places that African Americans could move, and it was certainly the first subdivision that we could reside in and have home ownership. You know, for me, St. Martin Village was idyllic. It was like a thriving commune because as people have mentioned before, we all nurtured and loved on each other and it was families pulled together to help raise and develop other families together. You know, the children, we played together, we made lifelong friends. Parents worked hard. You know, my father worked at IBM, as did many others who lived in that community, I mean, in our community. And all of us took pride in our property so that we could pass it on for generations to come, and that's what we've done. You know, when I heard about the zone change potential, I thought about what had happened some years ago, and I thought that was probably the first time that we actually had some kind of a bad thing to happen to the fabric of St. Martin Village. Bad thing to happen to the fabric of St. Martin Village. And that was when they closed Douglas School. Douglas was, the school building itself was probably only about 20 years old. And when they decided to integrate, when really what they did was desegregate, they bussed us. And that changed the fabric in a negative way of St. Martin Village early on. You know, I think that we need to, we appreciate you all giving us an opportunity to voice our opinion about what's taking place. In the spirit of St. Martin Village, in the spirit of St. Martin Village, I would request that you keep the zone as it is, have the developers build affordable housing that reflect the spirit of St. Martin Village so that they too can have, you know, nurture and build a strong family setting that they can pass on for generations to come. We've asked you to consider voting no to the zone change. Thank you. Thank you. Up next is Walter Gaffield followed by Roland Wolford, excuse me, Rolanda Wolford, and then Kenneth Million or Keith Million excuse me I'm Walt Gaffield 2001 Bamboo Drive I'm president of Fayette County Neighborhood Council I took a look at something different it's related to what Senator Thomas said but I looked at companies with the same agent or officer the same address and there are three that stick out actually the the applicant flagship communities SSK communities LLC and management SSK LLC two of them that I can find ratings for have F ratings from the Better Business Bureau so I looked at comments now comments don't necessarily determine what what a better business Bureau rating is flagship communities has no rating because the better business Bureau said it's only it hasn't been in existence for six months yet but I've seen on the internet that it's been around probably since I think I think it's been in yeah well 30 years okay so so there's a question of you have two companies out of that Erlanger office with the same two principals that started the company in 1985 involved and they have f ratings so i looked at some of the complaints and this doesn't mean the complaints are accurate changing prices for water and garbage pickup without notice rent on the both the lot and the trailer monthly property taxes eviction after eight years one week before Christmas with small children, cost $10,000 to move the home, sewage under trailer and in yard, maintenance problems ignored for a year, forfeit home, lose money 42 days after purchase, mother put out on the street, water bill $115 per month, one year out of three with a leaking roof, new management came in, raised the rent twice in one year, leases one month is month to month, owner turned street lights off lot fees raised three times in 12 months asked to buy units said no uh received letter that at least would be would not be renewed security deposit not refunded until complaint filed so i think you you have to look and find out before you act are these practices common uh in with the in that operation out of erlanger i don't know i'm sure some of the Complaints are not accurate, they're complaints. I'd urge you to look into it. It's not, they may be affordable, but when you add all the fees and look at the operation, is it worthwhile? That's something you have to ask yourself. Thank you very much. Thank you. One last thing, I have included my own thoughts on how this particular request really doesn't fit with the comp plan. And I've led with the part that the council actually voted on. And I've made comments on it and then I've added some other things from that. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Rolanda Woolfork followed by Keith Million. Rolando for Georgetown Street Neighborhood Association District 2. The mobile home, we in solidarity with St. Martin Village. Our neighborhood association is a part of Price Road. It is adjacent right across from it and where the new location is going to go. It's going to have an obstacle for our neighbors who's going to come out, whose houses face that street, Price Road. they're going to come in and go out we're going to have congestion and those they already have a hard time getting out of their homes to park and drive also it was there was some nice pictures that they showed y'all about them trailer parts because they show don't look like that and i see your pictures um we have had people from the mobile home come and ask us help us to pay our new way of paying because they changed the way we got to pay our rents now we now have to use a machine i mean a kiosk we're not used to this online have to teach the elderly how to use the online system to do that also to pay their rents mary greenberg stated to lrc about housing because they asked him what is affordable housing in Louisville? He said, anything that you pay over 30% of your income is too much. It's not affordable. That includes rent and mortgage. We provide back-to-school rallies for the neighborhood and the trailer park. A lot of council members have been there for our press conference. The mayor has too. So that's nice to know that they're doing that now, that we've been glad we was a role model for them out as well as free lunch, because we just did that, and we do that during spring break also. But that's nice to know that we can partner sometime, because there is a lot of no trespassing signs, so we didn't know if we can go inside to go let them know that we got these type of things going on. and flock cameras they just put up new fog cameras too that's so nice of them the safety too also when you the solar lights that they just put up they work sometimes they don't and they just put those up three weeks ago i document a lot because i ride that street a lot there's 18 wheelers there's box trucks because they go back and forth up and down the street but i'm glad to see on that picture that you kept the pond so we can but we may not be able to still see our ducks to feed those too but i just want to say thank you and we say no to the zone change thank you is uh kendra linem here yeah uh you're yielding your time to keith million is that right okay thank you very much So Keith Million is up next. You'll have six minutes when you come up. After Mr. Million will be Tim Mitchell and then Virgil Covington, Jr. Give an honor to my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. I want to thank y'all for the opportunity to speak to this particular circumstance. really what this is about it's a it's a business decision is based on the developer making money at the cost of our homes decreasing that's that simple I'm gonna give you another different attitude my name is Keith million 966 st. Martin's Avenue 1962 you know what what occurs and I've got this I'm gonna to give you a different perspective. Currently I reside in Loudoun County, Virginia. You can Google it, one of the richest counties in the world, in the country. We have a similar situation. Data centers want to move beside our neighborhood. The only difference is when it happens, or anything that gets moved next to your neighborhood, it's gonna raise the value of your home. If it's not, it's not even on the table. Nobody wants to see someone else benefit at the cost of you losing money. It's that simple. I don't believe any of you would. It's very simple. They're going to make money. The value of our homes are going to decrease. I didn't see that in the planning portion that this team did here. All the planning was for them. Wasn't no planning for St. Martin's Village. So when you look at it that way, it's about them making money. Don't care about St. Martin's Village. Those homes are going to decrease. Y'all know that. But it gets approved. Didn't tell St. Martin's Village nothing. But it got approved. I just asked how that happened. occurs in the business world, you know, folks, and I'm all about making capital, you're going to do that. But tell me how, you know, what you're going to do to help me. I haven't heard that. I know this team has planned for four or five years, I think it was. They made the plan. I just want to let them know it's not Luma Drive, it's Lima Drive. See the detail of their planning had nothing to do with St. Martin's Village, how it was going to impact St. Martin's Village, was all about how it was going to help that developer. Did y'all hear anything about how the planning was going to help St. Martin's Village? That's a question. I didn't hear anything, did y'all? That's a question. I didn't hear anything. I watched, I listened. See, it's a little different. Lally County, I mean, don't come here talking about decreasing the value of my home, my investment, because you're going to make some money. Not going to happen. When do you get back to the session? Happens all the time. It's not mobile homes, it's data centers. We have a problem with data centers because it takes away from the beauty of the land. But when they tell you, oh, the value of your home is going to go up about $120,000 a year, you'll listen to that. I haven't heard not one thing about what they are doing or what it's going to do to the value of my home at 966 St. Martins Avenue. I mean, how does that happen? I'm confused. I mean, I don't think I would let that happen to your home, would you? I simply say, think about that. If you were in my position and somebody wants to build a trailer park in my backyard and didn't tell you about it, planned it, looked at it for four or five years, Luma Drive, not Lama Drive. But you're going to tell me, oh, we're going to rezone you to a mobile home, zone. Ain't nothing mobile about 966 St. Lawrence Avenue. It's built in the ground, solid. The residential neighborhood. Let's flip it. Why don't we just change it to keep it as residential, make the mobile park home residential? If you can make a solid foundation home, trailer park, why not make the trailer park residential? I asked and denied that you approve this. Thank you. Thank you. Up next is Tim Mitchell, followed by Virgil Covington Jr., followed by Darrell Bond. Good evening, thank you Vice Mayor, Council, just for hearing me this evening. Sometimes I speak from the heart because that's the best way to do it. Just want to bring up a couple of points. I listened to some comments earlier. It talked about us having a low income, building low income housing. to have people more affordable. But in 1955, St. Martin Village was established for people of color to have housing, whether that be mid-level economically or what we used to say, and one of the other gentlemen said coming from the projects, I said coming from the shotgun house. we used to think they were wealthy because they lived in such a nice home. So then when we speak about putting affordable housing in neighborhoods, why do we often take an African-American neighborhood to put affordable housing in? That's the first one. So I do object to this, and I hope as council members that we voted for and you represent us, that you'll do the same. because oftentimes we look at 1955, a lot of the soldiers were coming back home, including my father-in-law and my uncle and my own father. They were coming back from Korea. So this was one of the first neighborhoods that if you could use your VA loan, you could qualify for a home. As a colonel right now and 27 years serving, it's our sworn duty to protect the citizens of this United States against enemies both foreign and domestic. It doesn't always take a weapon to do that. Sometimes it takes a little education. Read a few of these laws that's been actually discussed tonight. And as Mr. Simpson said, there is something about zoning that we didn't talk about. And if we actually stay to that, this should not be possible. So we'll start there. A couple other points I have. I've got 55 seconds. The quality of homes, the quality of the homes that are built, manufactured homes sometimes is built with glue that sometimes had formaldehyde in it. He may say no, but we'll look at Katrina. We found out a lot about that with manufactured homes. I ask that you look at the space between them with the old neighborhood, the old mobile home part, as well as the new mobile home part. If there's a fire there, it is a disaster. They're too close together. If we look at tornadoes that we had in Masterson Station, there were seven houses removed from their pad. What would happen in that trailer park and those manufactured homes in case that would happen when we do have tornadoes in Kentucky? Also, I just want to look at a traffic survey as well. If you look at the picture of the overlay they showed, they did not discuss that's a 25-mile-an-hour road. it backs up or it actually it's adjacent to the the cemetery you will not move that cemetery so you're gonna have to give way when you build your homes or if you try to put a walking sidewalk over there and again please do not allow this thank you thank you next up is Virgil Covington Jr. followed by Darryl Bond and then Stephen Harris Thank you all for spending some time with us tonight. We appreciate that. I grew up in the village through marriage. I'm back in the village, 479 Erie Road. I've always said, you know, as an educator we would say, it takes a village to raise a child. The village did it right. you've already heard stories about if you messed up with one parent you had all the parents the only way for a village to work is when the community is one and we grew up in an area that we were one just trying to make a little point we've asked you not to open up the streets You know, and we thought we had that settled, but I heard we have to come here and ask you not to open up St. Martin's, not to open up Dominican, and not to open up Tibbs Lane. I moved there when I was two years old. I'm 71 now. Those streets have never been opened up, and they don't need to be opened up now. I guess my final point is, and I don't know if you can understand this one or not. You've got a whole lot of people here representing the village. A lot of people. I think there's some other ones outside. Where are all the residents of the trailer park? If the trailer park is so important, has built a sense of community, why aren't they here? If they're meeting the needs of their community, why wouldn't there be one person that said, yes, change it from 550 to 601. Why wouldn't you have somebody, somebody, not the developers, but somebody who lives there? Why wouldn't you have them show up? They didn't show up at the last meeting. They didn't show up at this one. Last point, go to the subdivision and it says private property, no trespassing. We don't want to be a part of that. Thank you. Up next is Darryl Bond followed by Stephen Harris and then Dee Headley or Headley. Is Darryl Bond here? Thank you. All right, we're going to move on to Stephen Harris. We'll come back to Darryl Bond if he arrives. Stephen Harris. I'm going to yield my time to . Okay, you're Mr. Harris? Yes. Gotcha, all right. You said to Mr. Brown? We're going to . Gotcha, okay. When Mr. Brown comes up, he'll have nine minutes and that's our maximum time for yielding. So that's Mr. Harris. All right, up next is Dee Heathley or Headley. Followed by George Brown Jr. and then Leon Slatter. And I'll remind you when you come up, please give your name and council district for the record. and speak into the microphone. My name is Duval Headly. I represent the 3rd District. I am a taxpayer and I am a voter. I would like to represent the people outside this district in support of them saying no to this. And I say that on multiple things. Number one, what is wealth? The developer, it's about money. Everybody I've heard talk here, as a person outside of this community, I'm impressed with the wealth they have that is not financial. That adds to a town, that adds to a community. This is not the first time this has happened. It seems like if your middle class or lower class, your neighborhood is subject to staff that never comes around first and says, hey, what do you want in your neighborhood? I'd like to know why. Seems like a pretty simple question. You make all these decisions, you need to actually go to the people, maybe knock on their doors and say, what would you like to have next door to you? I like the guy's idea, change the zoning of the trailer park to residential and expand this neighborhood. Sounds like a pretty solid neighborhood. and size to it seems like it'd be a pretty good idea. And I know this, you know, is maybe old-fashioned, but I come from a family that was literally one of the first ones in this state and definitely one of the first ones in this community, and I hate seeing what's happened. The last 20 years, I've been a caregiver for the people that I love who have now passed. I've got some free time, which means if we don't start waking up and actually representing people that aren't millionaires and aren't out-of-state college students, I'm going to start raising money and getting voters together and get people in office that will represent the majority of the community, not the minorities of wealthy people and out-of-state college students who aren't even residents. We need to wake up. What made this town great from the very beginning was the character, the amenities, the things that made it different. If we're no different, then why would I want to live here? And I'd like to live here because I've got history here. And if you're going to live here, you should add to that history, as each one of council members, you should say, hey, this is what I want it to be. I want to be proud that maybe I've got kids that I want them to stay here and grow up here too. Not really that hard, not difficult. You know? And if you don't want to do it, Let's get some other people in, vote some new folks in, raise some money for them. Because it can't keep going this way. You're going to destroy this town and this nice group of people. I really do like the idea of adding to the St. Martins with the lamb next door. Why can't you zone for that? Thank you. Thank you very much. Next up is George Brown, Jr. You'll have nine minutes, followed by Leon Slatter. Vice Mayor Wu, members of the council, it is a pleasure to be here this evening. My father and bonus mother moved into 489 Dominican Drive in the mid 60s. My sister moved into a house on St. Martin's Avenue in the late 60s. The story of the village is one that certainly means something to the people as you can see by the people that are here. This is the second time that people from the village have come out to let the Planning Commission and the Urban County Council know what this means to them, to this community. Attorney Simpson did a fantastic job. He gave some information tonight that I didn't know about. no place in Lexington is there a zone for a mobile home park, M1P, anywhere. Why is it all of a sudden you're going to come and you're going to bring a mobile home park adjacent to the village? I forgot to do something, too. My name is George Brown. I'm a state representative. I live in the first council district. Let me pick up my thought. I told Mr. Simpson that he did a wonderful job in talking about the history of African Americans in this community. This is my home. I've lived in Lexington all my life, aside from going to Tennessee to get my college education. I ran for office and won a council seat in 1974. I served for 13 years on the Urban County Council. I have now been in the General Assembly for 10 years and just won a sixth term. So elected representative, I applaud you all for what you do. I was an elected representative for 23 years And there's no higher calling in my opinion than that of a public servant. I was talking to a fraternity brother of mine some years ago before he passed. And it's difficult to understand the isms that exist in our community. But he told me that up until 1955, no African American could borrow money in this town to buy a house or to buy land. Think about that. Most of you have not had that experience. You've not had the experience of being relegated to a section of this city that was shotgun houses. Some of you all probably don't know what those are, but you can see from the front door all the way to the back. But someone said earlier that when people got the opportunity to live in the village, it's like the Jefferson song. I'm moving on up. Moving on up to the east side. And the people that lived in the village had made it. and those of us that didn't, we were not there yet. So the stories of the village is critical and important to understand. We always have a tendency. We understand and know that in the black community, people always come and tell us, and they give us these glowing stories about what they're going to do for us. and how much they're going to take care of us. That's what happened with the zone change or this proposal to develop that 16.51 net acres of land between the trailer park and St. Martin Village. They came after the fact and they're going to tell us that we have a great thing for you that's going to make your neighborhood better. It's going to be absolutely awesome. But they didn't ask us what we wanted. They didn't ask the citizens in the village what would be in their best interest. They just said, well, we're going to do what's best and right for you. I sit in your seats, and it's a tough decision. But the tough decision is the right decision, and that is what is fair and right. The people of the village are simply asking you to do what you have been elected to do, and that is to represent them. Represent them. Give them a break. Do not put something in their neighborhood that is unwanted and is not needed. I said before the planning commission that people give you bells and whistles. It's a wonderful thing. And it will be absolutely outstanding. But a pig is a pig. And if you put lipstick on that pig, it's still a pig. This is a pig. This patrols zone change as a pig. And do not do something to the people of the village that they didn't ask for, they don't deserve, and no one talked to them about whether it should be done or not. Before I finish, I want to thank the persons that allowed me to speak on their behalf. And that was my niece, Robin Connor, and that was my new friend, Stephen Harris. I didn't know they were going to give me the extra time. But you know, hopefully you all hear and dig deep. Listen with your ears, with your heart, and with your mind. And turn this zone change down and let people know in this community that the Lexington Fayette Urban County Council is about doing the right thing. We'll do the right thing for the people of this community, the people who trust you, The people who trust you and trust this government to do the right thing as it relates to the people of this community. African Americans have worked, and I won't use the S word, but have told and strode to make this community what it is. And the people from the village have told you the stories of what the village means to this community. Do not, please do not underestimate the feelings and the essence of what the village is about. They told you about Douglas School on Price Road. Always in this community when integration and making something better has come about, the institutions that were in the black community have always had to change, have always had to be done away with. Miss Alva said Mitchell, no, Alva Mitchell. She told the story about closing Douglas Elementary School. She went to Douglas Elementary. She was too young to go to the high school. When I was a student at Paul Lawrence Dunbar High School, the original Paul Lawrence Dunbar High School at 549 North Upper Street, it closed as a high school. I defied my mother for the first time in my life, and I told her I was not going to Lexington Catholic, and I prepared myself to die because I knew she was going to kill me. She let me go to Lexington Catholic, I mean to Dunbar. Dunbar was the epitome. There were students that did not get to go to Paul Lawrence Dunbar High School at 549 North Upper Street. And that hole, that hole of Boyce Douglas and Paul Lawrence Dunbar High School has never been healed or closed. This is the same thing that will happen if this zone change is granted for this mobile home park adjacent to St. Martin Village. So members of the council, please do not, do not approve this zone change. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Last up is Leon Slatter. My name is Leon Slatter, District 1. I live in Oakwood subdivision. I'm pastor of Catantown Missionary Baptist Church for 38 years. I have a statement I just want to read to you all. It seems to me that in Lexington, Kentucky, there is an organized, unspoken plan to destroy black and our mid-to-low-income neighborhoods by neglect. You do this, you're neglecting this community. You are neglecting them. You don't have a choice but not to approve this plan. These are Lexington citizens. give you an idea. Don't hold me to it, but I'm going to give you my best. Sixteen houses on Ohio Street that is not designated sober living houses. Ten houses in Howland. That's now designated sober living houses. We just had one open up in Oakwood. What is that about? What is it? You all represent us. Where is the representation? In Caton Town. You all went back to 1960 to find some zoning to open up a business in a historical overlay at Todd and Cadentown Road. Two doors down from the church in this supposedly historical overlay that's for a single family living. we just had a sober living house open up. What is that? Where are you all? Where? I'm going to be finished, but I want to know where you are. And if you approve this, you're going to show us tonight where you are. And if you approve it, If you approve it, I'm going to leave it right there. Thank you, Mr. Slater. That is the end of public comment. We're going to do another break. It's 821 right now. Let's reconvene at 830 while we'll continue with rebuttals. Thank you all. Thank you. If y'all will please take your seats. Go ahead and find your seats. We'll get back going here. All right, thank you very much. We're going to come back in the session. Before I call on representatives for rebuttals, I just want to say thank you to all the community members who came out tonight. This is not the most fun way that you can think of to spend a Tuesday night, I'm sure, but it's obviously very important. And I really, really appreciate you all coming out, not just giving your opinions, but also sharing your stories with all of us. uh we're going to move on to rebuttals starting with planning staff if you have additional comments or rebuttal you'll have five minutes ms wade thank you vice mayor wu members of the council i do have a few items just to clarify for the record one of the citizens mentioned spacing between structures the m1p zone which you have in front of you actually requires that any mobile home be at least 20 feet from another mobile home which is actually in excess of what a lot of our residential zones require he mentioned masters and station a lot of those homes are only six feet apart so it does require a greater distance between the structures than was brought forward and in terms of the place builder i want to really clarify how that works in the comprehensive plan and what it means to be for a recommendation in the comprehensive plan so here we go the place builder lays out a process by which zone changes are to be considered by the planning commission and ultimately the council and the first step is for the applicant to choose a place type the second step is for them to choose a development type and then the third step is to choose a proposed zone so on this graphic from the comprehensive plan page 269 this is the place type enhanced neighborhood then a proposed development type so again it says the most suitable development types are and it gives four codes low density residential medium density residential medium high density and then mixed use or low density non-residential and then it gives list of recommended zones all of the place types have this same step-by-step review and recommendation from the comprehensive plan there is no requirement that any of these zones be be picked by an applicant what is asked for is if a recommended zone is not selected that the applicant provides some justification as to why a different zone is is being requested and again I just want to emphasize the comprehensive plan as a whole is recommend is a full of recommendations goals objectives policies what we want big picture for our community and so big picture we want more housing units I think we have to remember that the planning staff did not dictate to the applicant what type of of housing units to propose they brought in a development project that proposes a variety of housing options in our community and the staff found a way for us to support that and recommend that to the Planning Commission but again to clarify the recommended zones are from the comprehensive plan again we hear this often I probably shouldn't quote it but case law says that a comprehensive plan is a road map not a straight jacket so these particular zones are not mandated I want to be clear so you don't have to pick a zone from this list in terms of I guess one other item that might have covered it for me i appreciate the neighborhood's concern as well because they obviously have lived there a long time and are interested in what happens next to them so we do have a vacant piece of property that is proposed for development and whether it's this particular application or another I believe our community has to continue to grow and infill where there are opportunities. I want to make sure that if Mr. Simpson's findings were provided for the record, there are quite a few that do not reference the comprehensive plan. And so I would, on the record, say that those are not appropriate to include. there was no mention about traffic studies today and there was one about that about in terms of how many new vehicular trips might be brought forward with a an expansion of the park and then also I mentioned earlier in my questioning of mr. Simpson he mentioned in these findings references to only three of the design policies from the comprehensive plan and on the record I would like to say that design policy 12 does not apply and it would be design policy 8 that I believe this project does comply with and then just I guess to your discernment policy number 4 which has to do with context sensitive design would be up for consideration I would note that this project is proposed in a zone where there is the existing zone adjacent so m1p already exists here in this dark kind of maroon color and they are requesting to expand it to the east so in that regard it is compatible with existing development and context sensitive to one direction but I understand that the the neighbors also believe that it is not context sensitive to expand the mobile home park to the east further towards St. Martin's Village. Happy to answer any questions for the rest of the evening. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Wade. Next up is rebuttal from the petitioner. Mr. Nicholson, you'll also have five minutes. Thank you. I'll be very quick and kind of save my main comments for conclusions but I was going to point out the same thing that Ms. Wade pointed out with regards to place builder. I think she did an excellent job and so I won't kind of you know essentially relitigate exactly what she said and you know this request is in compliance with the comprehensive plan for the litany of reasons that we have outlined in our justification that the staff then took an unbiased review and made their full staff report and specific recommendations to the Planning Commission the Planning Commission then adopted their recommendations just removing the connectivity points that the neighborhood was so concerned with and so it is in compliance with the comprehensive plan as Miss Wade kind of pointed out and to that again to be incredibly clear no road connections in the St. Martins are contemplated whatsoever with this proposal it is a specific note that requires us to terminate those roads and how that gets done we're going to work with you all we're going to work with the neighborhood and the Planning Commission to see how best everybody would like that to be done whether it's a closure of roadway whether it's a cul-de-sac-ing of the existing stub roads however that works out it has to be done it cannot basically connect there's a lot of talk about the monthly payments that somehow would magically increase to $3,000 the monthly payments I gave you are it. There are no HOA fees, there are no road funds, that is it. This is an affordable housing developer that believes in creating a community and absolutely is trying to give an affordable place to live and to function for a large minority majority population that needs this type of housing. And as far as installing affordable housing in only certain areas, I represent several affordable housing developers. We try to find any dirt we possibly can. It is so hard to do, and it is so challenging. And no matter where we are, we hear the exact same thing. Please take this affordable housing someplace else, just not into our backyards. This parcel is already split zoned. This is a parcel that is M1P today and also R1D. The area that we are talking about is the R1D portion of the parcel, but the parcel itself is also zoned M1P. This is only talking about a 10% increase in the existing mobile home park, and it's being done in a way that is expressly in line with the design elements of the comprehensive plan as detailed in the staff report and our justification. Thank you all. Thank you. And next up is a rebuttal from opposition. Mr. Simpson, you'll also have five minutes. Thank you, Vice Mayor, members of the Council. Appreciate the opportunity. I've probably tendered 200 proposed findings of fact to this body, and I've never had any of them adopted, because I give them to your counsel in advance of the hearing, which I did a couple of months ago, and they work up alternate findings of fact for approval and disapproval. No applicant is wedded to propose findings of fact, because I've learned the law department is going to craft their own. With respect to the goals and objectives, though, I find it interesting that the staff says that, notwithstanding, according to their characterization, that the most suitable zone is not included, mobile home parks for this particular application, but it can be because the comp plan is not a straight jacket. Notwithstanding the fact that the comprehensive plan is the guide, the recommending land use decision making that does not include mobile home parks for the subject property. It includes a lot of other recommendations, but it does include mobile home parks anywhere. Likewise, even if you look at the intent of the mobile home park zoning, what it says in the intent, the very first paragraph, this zone should be established in accordance with the goals and objectives, policies, and development criteria of the comprehensive plan. Well, there's nothing in the goals and objectives about expanding mobile home parks or mobile home parks at all and hadn't been for half a century or more. So that's not in the – you're not accomplishing the intent of the comprehensive plan. There's nothing in the policies that talks about mobile home parks being recommended in connection with the intent of this zone. So you have no guidance there to rezone this property in accordance with the intent of the zoning ordinance that you're proposed to adopt. The comprehensive plan also under theme A talks about creating affordable housing responsibly. That's under theme A. You can pick and choose under theme A any of those goals and objectives that you want, but it talks about implementing affordable housing responsibly. And so I ask you again, is charging rent on top of the mortgage payment plus paying for the road responsible affordable housing as a starting point to encourage more affordable housing in this community? The answer is no. Finally, your comprehensive plan talks about repeatedly increasing density all the time. Well, in this application, they're actually decreasing density. They could actually provide affordable housing with the assistance of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund without doing a zone change by using the existing zoning single family and closing the streets so we don't have 600 cars going through St. Martin's Village. It would save you all a lot of time. You could have affordable, single-family housing that people wouldn't have to pay rent for. They wouldn't have to pay the streets, pay for the streets, and they would develop generational wealth like we all aspire to do. To me, that should be the goal of this body with respect to affordable housing. Not have people who are desperate for housing have to pay for the land, pay for the mortgage on the mobile home, and pay for the streets. That is not appropriate affordable housing. It is not context sensitive to the existing and surrounding area as provided and required by your comprehensive plan. And your zoning ordinance, with respect to its text, is not being complied with because there are no goals and objectives. There are no policies that specifically encourage a mobile home park zone for this property. So as a matter of law, with all due respect, I believe you're obligated to deny the zone change. based on the findings that I'm sure Ms. Jones will have for you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Next up, we're going to go to summations. Each party will have three minutes, and I understand in this context it's hard not to be repetitive as you sum up, but try your best. And we'll start with planning staff. You'll have three minutes for summation. In summation for this evening, I will just reiterate that the planning division recommended one thing, but the Urban County Planning Commission modified those findings to address what they heard at their public hearing most stringently, which is all of the connections. And so the Planning Commission still felt it important to offer this particular type of housing, whether the specifics are pleasant for people to think about or not. I think it's an option that is available in our community that really can't be ignored. so if there are developments that want to expand and provide this type of housing that that is we should consider that an option in our community just like every other housing type that we consider again the comprehensive plan does not specifically mention mobile home parks but it does mention dwelling units residences housing providing a variety of housing for our community and that's really what is important not what the whether it says single-family or condo or duplexes but that we offer lots of housing options so again the Planning Commission did recommend approval of the requested zone change with the knowledge that a final development plan would be coming back to them and they could evaluate further how the property would be developed in in terms of lot configuration and street configuration. I would note that the staff provided a revised set of findings from the Planning Commission related to the hearing that they held on August 22nd. Thank you. All right, thank you, Ms. Wade. Up next is summation from the petitioner. You'll also have three minutes, Mr. Nicholson. Thank you. Mr. Simpson in his opening said that we shouldn't stigmatize uses or neighborhoods and then proceeded to demonize an entire industry and specifically a property owner that's trying to bring affordable housing to Lexington when we have constantly said we need more, we need more, we need more. Three units the other day opened and it made the front page of the paper. We're talking about trying to bring in 52. yes it's a hybrid method but it's a hybrid method that does allow the building of equity without a doubt now this owner is also putting their money where their mouth is they have already spent millions of dollars in this park and received state and national awards because they are trying to create a true community in a property that has been ignored it also has been around since the 50s and 60s prior owners have let it deteriorate and it led and just ignored it this one came in and and within two years is turning around and getting absolute praise for it and is trying to do even more. Now, at the same time as investing in this project, it also is helping the city basically do an infrastructure improvement that does help this neighborhood out tremendously, that does take away the sanitary sewer overflows that have plagued this entire area. The comprehensive plan might not reference affordable housing, but again, as we've been talking about, it does stress the need for affordable housing. Cities like ours that need and desperately want affordable housing has to use every tool in their toolkit. This is one toolkit, and it's only a 10% expansion of an existing use. We have said yes to shielding St. Martin's Village every turn that they have asked. We will cut off the roads. We will provide all the buffering that we possibly can. We just also need to be able to slightly expand this mobile home park in order to provide a well-designed and amenity-focused project to keep creating a community for a population that desperately needs it and has also been ignored. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We're going to move on to questions from count. Oh, my apologies. I already marked you off. Mr. Simpson, you have three minutes. I have microphone addiction. I apologize. I didn't bring up stigma. Mr. Nicholson talked about how poorly this trailer park had been operated for decades. And regrettably, St. Martin's Village had to suffer for all those decades based on a promise that I'm sure was made when it was approved. It was going to be a wonderful housing opportunity for the people that were going to live there. We were going to do the right thing. Trust us. Everything is going to be great. It's going to be wonderful. We're going to have all these amenities. We're going to have this, and it's going to be affordable. And now St. Martin's Village is being asked to, and this body, accept another promise about a housing choice that has a stigmatized history. It does. but St. Martin's Village is going to be asked to bear the experience of a new experiment of new and improved mobile homes next to their neighborhood after suffering for more than five decades with a mobile home park that failed for half a century. Trust me, I would suggest to you that there's very little basis for trust with this model and particularly at this location for St. Martin's Village. Besides all of that, you still have to comply with the plan. The staff says they have at least suitable zoning recommendations for all these place tights. Suitable. One of which is not mobile home parks. It's not there. It's not even a suitable one. It's certainly not a recommended one. The text of the zoning ordinance says you have to follow the goals and objectives if you're going to attach this zone to a property. There's nothing in the goals and objectives about mobile home parks. under no stretch of any reasonable interpretation of the law and under no stretch of any deference to historic neighborhoods who've survived crises and challenges that 90% of the people in this room don't have a clue what they had to go through. And they still want to live in the neighborhood where they've had opportunities to live in all the places that used to shut the doors to them. They chose to live because it is a neighborhood not just in the location of the homes, but in the spirit and the soul of each person who testified here and who wish they could testify if they could get down here. That is a special kind of neighborhood that this body and all bodies need to preserve and encourage. That kind of community spirit that thrives and gives us vitality and gives Lexington a distinctive place that it finally is honoring a neighborhood that is deserving of its history. We ask that you deny this zone change. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. All right, now we will open up the floor to questions from my colleagues. Make sure to ask all of your questions during this portion so that once we close the hearing, we will only be deliberating amongst ourselves. So please sign in to speak. We're going to start off with Council Member Reynolds. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'll start by asking Ms. Wade a question. I know that in Lexington we only have a few mobile parks. How many are there and they're all M1P, correct? They're not all M1P. If memory serves, I think we have five mobile home parks and I believe only two are M1P. What are the other two? There are a variety of zones. There's, I believe, one that's B6P, one that's B4, and the other one might be light industrial. And in the comprehensive plan, are all of the different zones listed? No. So that's why this one is not in it. And there really was no discussion about this particular zone and how it could help affordable housing in the future or not. I would say that's correct. Okay. No discussion. So it kind of was silent on the issue. All right, that's all from you. And then if I can have Mr. Nicholson come up. We talked about the rent for these units, but it's actually not broken down to what the rent would be. So they would buy their mobile home. They have to buy the mobile home from this provider. They're not allowed to buy their own and bring it in rent? That's not true. So they are? Yes. And there is a kind of litany of different situations that exist there today. So I could buy my own and then I could pay the rent to put it there. They could all look different like the adjacent mobile home park. They're not all going to look the same. So we would try to, for this property, they are the new style manufactured homes. It is not a throwback to the models from the 80s. But if I buy my own and I bring it, it could look different. I mean, it would have to be a modern manufactured home. It could not just be a kind of displaced trailer from the 60s, 70s, and 80s. So it would have to be to a certain standard. Yes, and that's also from the state itself. Okay, and how much did you say the rent was for the land? Is it what? I think it's $4.50 a spot. $4.50 a month? Yes. Okay. And is there parking? Yes, so each individual lot has two parking spaces that are off the road. Okay. And, okay, I think those were my questions for now. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. I might circle back. Sure, thank you. Member Baxter. Thank you Vice Mayor. Ms. Wade, there you are. Can you tell me if there were any other concerns or opposition from any other neighboring communities or businesses other than St. Martin's Village? There were only people that spoke at the hearing from St. Martin's Village. thank you um and then can you do you have any history about how long this parcel has been zoned r1d or if we've had any file development plans on this property that have been we have not had any development plans on this portion of the property i know from the research that the first portion of the mobile home park was rezoned in 1960 and then this it expanded in 1970 or 71. the back part yes it went back okay and so my thought would be that that when that occurred it left this piece in its existing zone okay and i know that um mr nicholson gave us um number of units per acre or maybe you did on this development do you know what that would be in a typical r1d zone like what would the density be there because this was 3.15 an acre is what i wrote down i would have to do some math okay i'm just i guess my question is would it be significantly more dense in an r1d or would it have the potential to be more dense as it's currently zoned so r1d uh requires basically 6 000 square feet we're proposing 5 000 square feet when we look for each lot when we looked at taking away all open space and amenity areas i think we probably could have added seven or eight more units total if we removed all open space features because it's larger lots in r1d okay don't sit down mr nicholson um thank you tracy um okay so we've heard several of our residents say that they felt like there was little outreach done. Can you recap what outreach was done in the neighborhood? So I think a lot of the outreach was discussing about the comprehensive plan aspect of this. We had a neighborhood meeting that was honestly the most well-attended neighborhood meeting I've ever been a part of. An overwhelming majority of the comments were about the connections. I would push it probably around 90%. it was the concerns of the connections themselves okay um can you tell me i understand that your client is this is their business model but was it ever a consideration to develop this land any other way than an expansion of the mobile home park so this this parcel has always been part of the mobile home park and so when they bought the acreage you know they they purchased this with the mobile home park okay um i understand you as saying that all of them would be owner occupant each individual unit would be owner occupant would any of them be rentals so uh since flag flagship has taken over the kind of ownership aspect of this that has been a major push i think I think there's only nine units that remain rentals in the entire park, which is 549 that exists today. And so this will all be geared towards owner-occupied. Is there a lease term on the land or will the owners rent forever? It is. They don't have to rent forever by any means. But there's never an option for them to purchase the land? Not the land itself, no. The overwhelming majority of the users basically run out the mortgage the 15 to 20 years and then move the unit to a different piece of property using the collateral and equity that they built up in the unit itself. Okay. And then I know you mentioned a six-foot landscaping berm, but I can't tell from the development plan if there's any proposed fencing. Yes, along the entire back property line. Six-foot? Yes. and it's a required buffer to buffer screening for the uh and a landscape buffer yeah okay it's a 10-foot landscape buffer with a six-foot fence hedge or berm okay i think that's all i have right now thank you thank you council member civigny thank you chair um my question is for tracy um Thank you. With our, with the new UGM, the urban growth management, what, if there were, if there's, if this is worker, worker housing, what are they, what are they actually able to do without a zone change? Can't they go to R1T? I think it goes to R1E. it goes up one zone. I think it so you could go one one zone denser. Okay I thought it went to R1T from any one of the R1s. I can check the ordinance. Okay could you because I actually I'm kind of interested in that. If you have some other questions for me. Yeah and then my my next question is because I've got a couple of copies of like our renditions on the goals and objectives could you read i just want to make sure that i'm reading theme a goal five correctly You all wouldn't mind checking your pockets or purses. We have a musical phone in the room somewhere. If we can have that silence, that would be terrific. Thank you. And we can come back to meet and the next person can ask their questions. Ms. Wade, are you ready for an answer or do you need to look something up? So they may go five and then and then I reminding us about the UGM and what they what they have the right to actually develop there. Well, I've got the goal five in front of me right now. So what's the question about that one? Could you just read the goal five that we passed? Yes. So theme A is growing and sustaining successful neighborhoods. Goal five of that theme is ensure equitable development and rectify Lexington segregation by race and socioeconomic status caused by historic planning practices and policies. Okay. Thank you. That's what I thought it was. And then, yeah, just I'm kind of curious what they're allowed by Wright to do on that piece of property. And then I'm struggling to, is the picture of the new-looking development, is that the actual R1D lot, or is there a portion of that that's M1PE already? The development plan you've seen is just the R1D portion of the property. So that rectangular piece is just the R1D? It's like 15 acres? I think 16.5. Okay, thanks. Yes, so a lot shall be regulated under the provisions as noted. You are correct. All of the R1 zones shall be regulated as R1T. That's correct. So an R1T lot, so they could develop townhomes there by right. Yes. And they could be both leased townhomes, they could be sold townhomes. They would have to, they would, but their restriction on that would be, they would have to sign a restriction to stay under 80% AMI. Which is sounds like what they want to do is provide an affordable solution for worker class housing. And how many townhouse units could they develop on that size property? Yeah, the minimum lot size is about a quarter of the R1D zone. That's what I thought. So 1,500 versus 8,000. You still have the same amount of probably roads, maybe even more associated with that. Usually townhouses can be developed at between 10 and 20 units per acre. Okay. That was just my question is I think they have a right to do something if they want to do something that's good and meaningful. So, and I just wanted to make sure that that goal was read. That was it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Fogle. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I believe my question is to you. You said that you met with the neighborhood. Do you know the date that you met with them? It was in the, kind of, I think it was one of the last weeks of July, I believe. And so at that time, had you already met with the trailer park and purchased this piece? So they purchased this back in- Did you meet with them first and purchased- We purchased property in December of 21 and took over operation in January of 22. Okay. Before you purchased the property and went into partnership with them, was this neighborhood involved? Did you talk to them then? I do not know if the flagship talked to the neighborhood prior to purchase. And the reason why I'm asking these questions is because what I have seen historically, things happen, then you bring in the black community and you really tell them what you're going to do. But they just showed up now. So I'm having a hard time with what I'm hearing up here as far as the timeline. And that would have been the same question to planning also. Earlier in a statement that was made, I just want to know how many meetings did you all have with St. Martin Village about this property, this development? So we only had one official neighborhood meeting. I've spoken with several members of St. Martin's community multiple times throughout this process. Okay, and I want to set the record straight. I think there was a question asked. Was there any, I think Council Member Baxter asked this question. Was there any other neighborhoods that was opposed to this? Is that what you asked? And the question, I think the answer was no. Not at the planning commission that came out. Okay, so I just want you to know that I'm looking at Winburn, Green Acres. don't don't don't don't don't I'm just looking at a lot of neighborhoods that's sitting out here and that's because I've built relationships and I know folks that's sitting out here so it disturbs me that it was that on the record it said no one else stood up but St. Martin Village and so I just wanted just to kind of correct that i'm happy to clarify there were several members of the public that came out to support st martin's with the specific testimony that they were here for st martin's and so that's why i think we keep on saying that all of the public comments were about st martin's not other neighborhoods yeah but they live in the surrounding they're touching st martin's So that would answer Councilmember Baxter's. Sure. And I don't know, I'm going to start this. And I'm finished with you. Okay. Thank you. I just need to do this. This is my, well, this is my first time up here on council. But if we only, if we have to finish like right now, I just want to say that we must maintain and preserve the integrity of black history. Our black history. Point of order, my apologies. Is that point of order? This is. When do I get to say this? So we're going to have a session right now where we're asking questions of all three parties. And then we go into closed session for discussion amongst ourselves. No more questions for them. So I want to respect their time and keep this time right now for questions for the three parties. Okay. Well, thank you. I guess I'll give it to y'all back there. All right. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilmember Lynch. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I have a question for Ms. Wade, please. Were there any requirements of the applicants to do a traffic study for any impacts, particular impacts on Price Road for the increased traffic that would occur due to this new development? No. The requirements of the zoning ordinance indicate that there has to be 100 new trips in the peak hour, and this number of dwelling units does not surpass that level. We estimate that there would be approximately between 500 and 600 new trips for the entire day for the number of dwelling units. Okay, thank you. And Mr. Nicholson, I have a question for you as well. Did you all, just to do your due diligence, do any kind of traffic impact studies for Price Road? Not to my knowledge, because the zoning ordinance is really clear this is when traffic studies come into play. When we're only talking about 52 housing with a density of like, you know, 16 and a half acres, a density of three units per acre, it would be very rare to have a traffic study in that scenario. Okay. And then my next question is for you. Do you have any kind of pictorial examples of what the buffer zone would be between the neighborhood and the proposed mobile home park extension? Like, do you have any visually so we can see what the berm is going to look like and the fencing? We don't as far as where we are, because that's usually just a final development plan issue as far as what we're actually talking about. I've told neighborhood representatives that I'm happy to sit down and figure out what they want those berms to look like, especially at the street terminations. I do not want to be here telling the neighborhood what they want. I'm more than happy to sit down with them to make sure that they have a full input on what this looks like as far as the buffer area. Thank you so much. Thank you. Council Member Plowman. Thank you, Vice Mayor. And this is a question for Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson, in your opening remarks, I believe you alluded and didn't really go into too much detail on what you had learned. You said, I've learned a lot in this experience. Can you share that? I can get through it. I've represented. And since I've been doing this in 88, every neighborhood and every major zoning fight that's come before this body at one time or another all over the county. Most of the people that live in those neighborhoods stay there maybe five or six years, some longer, of course. But I've never seen the human connection, the human history that dates back 70 years, seven decades, generations of neighbors that are still connected to this neighborhood, who are proud of it because they survived and thrived in the face of unbelievable obstacles that most of us have no clue about. and the passion that they have for their neighborhood beyond just what it looks like, beyond just the structure of the houses, but the sense of community, of belonging, of reliance upon one another, of taking care for one another, those kinds of values, those kinds of human connections, I've never seen in 41 years of practicing law. Special. Thank you for sharing. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. I have questions for all three parties and I'd like to start with Ms. Wade if I could. There was several mentions about the idea that because the requested zone is not a recommended zone in the comp plan, that it violates the comp plan. Can you clarify that one more time for me? I think it's the opinion of the Division of Planning and ultimately the Planning Commission in their action that that is not the case, that these are recommended zones and there is a process by which really the plan suggests those might be the best zones, but that other zones are still in our zoning ordinance and available to be requested. but in implying for those it's the applicant's responsibility to justify why that zone is appropriate or and not just appropriate but also how it meets the comprehensive plans goals objectives and policies and kind of similarly there was also quite a few mentions that the fact that mobile home parks are not in the comp plan are all place types and residential types mentioned in the comp plan well there are seven place types mentioned and then I believe it's also seven development types none of them really go to a great detail of specifying recommended dwelling unit types it doesn't talk about condos or or so for townhouses or anything like that it's it's more generic than that and recommends dwelling units and residences and talks about scale as opposed to a particular type and so part of that argument was that because they're not specifically mentioned in the comp plan that there's no guidance in sort of steering where they live how would you answer that well i think um we would only look to expand or or use the m1p zone whether where it exists already i don't think lexington or or many communities are looking to build new or expand beyond create new mobile home parks but i do think that it's a viable option for housing thank you miss wade mr nicholson um another thing that we heard a lot about from the opposition was about the zone about the fact that the zone that you all are proposing is not in one of the recommended zone so the real simple question is why didn't you all pick a recommended zone from the comp plan instead they don't allow any type of mobile homes in those recommended zones in r3 r4 mu1 mu2 that is not mobile homes not allowed at this point mobile homes pretty much are only allowed in the m1p there are historic parks that had different zoning prior to kind of the the most recent kind of updates in zoning and so at this point if you are going to expand a mobile home park it has to be m1p and this one is directly adjacent and actually part of the same parcel of an m1p yeah so given that um and and understandably that these developers and these owners this is what they do right is is is the mobile home parks but kind of knowing the way in the city that a lot of zone changes get contentious i think you have done this long enough that you knew that there's going to be some level of contentious and we're and we're seeing that um was there any thought from the developer to do something different to do something that was not an extension of their mobile home park did they consider any other sort of development type whether it's single family or condos or whatever else they are only a mobile home developer and so I believe that that is all they looked at. I will say that like we don't get to say that any zone change is easy anymore when single family on single family fights each other because of lot size it's a fight no matter what and so I think no matter what is getting proposed on this piece of property I think we would be hearing the same arguments as far as the connectivity goes with without a doubt so speaking of density this proposed density you said is lower than the existing density at st martin's village correct why did you choose that level of density especially compared to the existing trailer park that is way more dense having a trailer park that dense that's not what flagship tries to do because flagship tries to establish clear lots just like it would a single family development and they try to have as much amenity space as possible the existing density is 7.68 for the the suburban point as it exists today st martin's is 4.56 and so what we tried to do is blend the 7.56 into the 4.56 and so the overall now if this is approved it gets the 7.6 down to 6.8 so it is decreasing but it's also matching the lot pattern that we saw in st martin's thank you for that i'm actually out of time but i'm going to allow my colleagues to to sign in uh again ahead of me if anybody would like to speak uh if not i'm gonna kind of plow forward with my other questions um mr nicholson what uh we we kind of talked about and had got a sense of the income level of the residents that you'd be serving based on the prices of these homes how would you describe the kind of residents that live in the existing mobile home park now how would you characterize them as far as like ami um either socio-economically demographically you know who who who is this mobile park serving is the question so we we have uh a litany of different races uh that are present today um it is minority majority and it kind of leans towards the hispanic population um that is a lot of what the kind of workforce housing is that we're seeing in this area but we have every kind of ethnicity you could imagine and i think most of our current residents from a socioeconomic standpoint would probably fall between 40 and 80 percent ami do rents go up uh the rents on the land do they go up on a regular basis not on a regular basis no okay what are rent increases based on i think we're doing year-to-year leases mostly three to five percent uh is rent increase uh can occur year over year how does that compared to the rental residential market in terms of the increases? It's been well publicized that Lexington was the number two highest rent increase town in all of America. So I think three to five would be on the very, very low end for Lexington. One of the things that makes this proposal special is the very nature of the you own your house the physical object of your house but you don't own the land that you're sitting on and you talked about a lot of folks living there through the end of their mortgage and then kind of uprooting and moving to a different parcel do you know how much it costs to move a trailer you know three thousand three thousand dollars okay What happens to their property if they can't afford the rent on their land? I think oftentimes that's where you see the sale going through, where it is someone purchases that unit from them, and it's a direct purchase where they are able to recoup any equity that they have in that situation. This isn't the old scenario where you can't move them, you can't resell them, you are stuck in on a kind of toxic loan. All right. Thank you, Mr. Nicholson. Thank you. Mr. Simpson, some questions for you as well. It seems like one of the the changes that were made in front of planning commission was to take out those three stub roads, that connectivity to the existing neighborhood. Right. So now that the two other ways you can get into this new development is through Price Road, and I'm blanking on the other one, but not through St. Martin's Village. Was that a big enough concession for you and your clients, or no? Because that wasn't a big part of it. It wasn't a concession. It was the right thing to do. But you have to understand that the Planning Commission can change their opinion on that at any point in time. It's not closed as if you all closed it. That's a separate statutory proceeding. Planning Commission can change their mind at some point in the future, particularly if the applicant wants to increase density or something, I mean they can change their mind. It's not set in stone. So when you talked about the idea that one of the criticisms that you had for this proposal was that they're proposing a zone that's not currently recommended by the comp plan. So is there a zoning change? If it was an R3 or an R4, if it was one of the recommended comp plan zones, would you be for it? That's not up to me. My folks are to develop the property under the existing zoning. You wouldn't need a zone change. As Council Member Svegni pointed out, there's a potential to increase density. In this case, you're going against almost every zone change you've approved since the comp plan was adopted by decreasing density. I guess, Mr. Simpson, what I'm trying to get at is kind of the core of the objection, right? Is the objection that this zone change is, in your mind, not in compliance with the comp plan or not in as a recommended zone? And I'm running out of time, so I'm actually going to go to my sort of central question. what would it take to get your these neighbors this community what would it take for a development plan to get to yes and is it possible yes absolutely develop under the condition the existing zoning and close the streets be a streamlined development you know one of the things that we need to do in this community is stop giving more than lip service to affordable housing and put money in it. We gave millions and millions to PDR. We've given potatoes in comparison to affordable housing. And then Mr. Wu, Vice Mayor Wu, just if you listen to what's been said about this recommended zoning and they say, well, it's not the most suitable, it's not recommended, but you can still use it. Okay, that's the argument from the other side. So I listen to that and I'm like, wow. So it's not the most suitable, which means St. Martin's Village gets the less suitable in terms of its impact on them in terms of the historic integrity of their neighborhood. The land is suited to match up with St. Martin's Village. Now, we can't have 600 trailers going through St. Martin's there's three access points to this property can accommodate single family houses or townhouses they would just go out a different direction that's a yes all right thank you mr. Simpson councilmember Fogle thank you vice mayor can you tell me how many mobile homes can I buy is there a restriction can I come in and buy three so again all new units will be owner-occupied and so it It would be owner occupied and so you couldn't have three and be owner occupied. And once I buy them, can I rent them out? No, it has to be owner occupied. So the owner of that specific unit lives in that specific unit. So I can live in the house and turn it to a sober living house and get the other people to come in? Sober living is not a permitted use in the M1P zone. It is in the residential zone that it is currently. But I can move three people in, charge them, and have them in my house and not call it sober living? Not in the M1P zone. But I can have anybody in my house that I want, right? How will you know that I'm not charging someone to live in the house with me? And I might not even be there. Who's checking that? We have a management company in agreements with all of our residents. And the only reason why I know is because I know what the oversight is down at the other part of the trailer house and it's absolutely zero oversight and it's in poor condition. I have a friend that lives there. So I'm just a little worried about it. That's the question I wanted to ask. Thank you. Sure. Thank you. Councilmember Baxter. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Ms. Wade? Just a clarifying question. if an approved development plan has zero connections, but council doesn't take specific action to close roads, how does that look going forward? Would we have to close a road, or if it's an approved development plan with a cul-de-sac or something, Like, would there ever be the potential, I guess, to open roads that were not blocked by a council action? In the scenario, are you assuming the zone change goes through? Sure. Okay. Just for sake of conversation. So if we assume the zone change goes through and the preliminary development plan that was adopted or approved by the planning commission, the Planning Commission will go back to that plan and the new plan should be in substantial compliance with it because we said this agrees with the comprehensive plan so if they said no connections then the expectation would be there would be no connections at the final development plan either and that would require either a waiver or cul-de-sacs to be built by the applicant okay a waiver to terminate yeah without a through street internally processed so those have been granted they don't require the council to close the other portion of the street in fact in some cases driveways already are accessing that portion I think in one of the photos we had two driveways were just right up adjacent to the end of the Stub Street. So closing that portion of the street would be problematic for the residents that are there. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Council members, any other questions for our three presenting parties? This will be your last chance. And just to clarify, the next section is not a closed session. It's a closed hearing. and all that means is we're not taking questions or we're not asking questions rather it's going to be just a discussion amongst ourselves but it'll be in this public venue and you all will get to hear it uh council members civigny yeah i'm sorry i do have one more um ms wade sorry kind of going back to the connections piece because i know specifically we stated in the comp plan connectivity of neighborhoods was important and we all have neighbors and neighborhoods that don't always want connectivity is there and and I know it was recommended by planning staff for connectivity what are the instances where connectivity like it's not not connecting is supported like what what type of what type of scenarios is not connecting a neighborhood supported Wow I think maybe this is just your opinion yeah from the regulations if they are they require connectivity really all the time so if there's a stub street it should connect or continue into the next development and that's a safety issue as much as a quality of life issue but there are instances where the Planning Commission has said no in this case the connectivity shouldn't happen and that's I think what happened a few months ago at this hearing they understood the social dynamic of the neighborhood and how important it was to not create those connections and the through movement through the neighborhood that that could be detrimental to the neighborhood so I think those are the kinds of factors that the Planning Commission would consider and and are above and beyond what the regulation says right that's the whole point of the public hearing is to gather that additional information. Okay thank you thank you very much that's all. Thank you. Councilmember Sheehan. Thank you chair and Tracy I have a question for you. It's kind of in the details so I'm looking at this that you gave us that's the findings that is amended. Yes. I see reference to theme A, goal 1B which says accommodate the demand for housing in Lexington responsibly prioritizing higher density and mixture of housing types and I see theme a goal 5e from the comp plan that is about implement and develop innovative programs such as land banks affordable housing fund community land trust or other methods to subsidize affordable housing my question is is there a reason that theme a goal 5b is not included here and that one says protect existing housing affordability for all and expand low and middle income housing across the city no I'm not sure why that wouldn't be included other than the applicant might not have cited it their justification statement it is kind of broad it seems like a city consistent with 1b here where goal 5e is listed so i'm i was just wondering if there was a reason why that one isn't cited because it seems consistent with this point no and just matching up with what we're saying about the comp plan and then sure what we're looking at here so there isn't a reason And it couldn't be included, but it hasn't at this point. Yes. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council members, any other questions for our presenting parties before we go into closed hearing? All right, with no more questions, I'm going to declare this hearing closed. At this point, no further evidence will be taken. Council will deliberate on the evidence that we've already heard. And at some point, I will entertain motions for findings of fact and the underlying ordinance. So, Council Members, if you wish to speak and begin discussion, I'll open the floor. Please sign in to speak, as always. Council Member Fogle. I'll start this rodeo. Now's your time. There you go. First of all, colleagues, I think most of us are pretty, some of us are not, some babies. But if you all remember Bo Winkle, the cartoon, said, hey, Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat. And he reaches in for the rabbit, and out comes the monster. I'm afraid there's a monster that's going to come out. And so what I would like to say is, it is 938, we have people over 70, 80, 91, and the rest of the community is still sitting here. Now, it's past my bedtime. And what that does is show me how important this zone change is. And so earlier when I was out of order, I was going to just say this. I believe, colleagues, that in this old, historic, first ever built subdivision, that we must maintain and preserve the integrity of black history and the black historic neighborhoods. Here's my facts. South End, Patterson Street, Pine Street, Marino, Carver School, and even Davis Bottom Ball Field. Those communities brought us together because every Saturday there was a ball game going on. Somebody was frying some fish and people was playing dominoes and our community existed. I heard someone talk about those lights that came on and you better be on the porch. That was true community. I heard from the presenter that they wanted to create a community. The community is already created. So does that mean you want to change the complexity of what this community looks like? And the rest of our history is washed away. We heard from the 70 and 80 and this beautiful 91 year old woman who came to fight for her community, who has a husband that's 95. Colleagues, our black neighborhoods are under attack. Can't find them hardly anymore. And me being a black woman and a black council woman of the first district, What I can tell you is I heard that there's five trailer parks, which three is in the first district. I am urging you all to please, I'm not supposed to say how I want to vote, because I want to say it. I'm asking you all to please, it's almost like tearing down the historic lyric and putting something else in this place. What little we have as a community, please allow us to keep it. Please allow these grandmothers to see their grandchildren and their great grandchildren and this history continue. Put up a community center. We need that over there. And the audacity to go and get in a contract with a trailer park without talking to the people in the community, ain't good, ain't good at all. I'm just breaking down the way we talk in the hood, right? So let me put my professional back on. I'm urging you all to vote no. Please leave this community, our community alone. And that means when I say our, that is the Windburn and the Marlboro. Our community, we spread out, but we still a community. And you see that at Roots and Heritage all the time. So I'm asking you to vote no, and that will be my vote. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Plumman. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I also will oppose this zone change. I live in the, I represent the 12th district. The 12th district is 70% of the land mass. It's home of all of our rural area. It also is important, more important in my mind, are the black rural settlements that happened right after the emancipation in the mid-1800s. And because it's in the 12th district, I've gotten involved in a project, and it's called A Sense of Place. And it's about recognizing and celebrating and realizing the impact that the hamlets and these inhabitants that lived there, these families, how much influence they had on the the evolution of Lexington, Kentucky, where it is today. So this project, this initiative, is called a sense of place. And I can't, I've sat here and I've elicited and I said, this is about a sense of place. What you have shared with us tonight is about a sense of place, and you deserve to keep that. So again, I will not be supporting the zone change. My colleagues have heard about our sense of place project and they have supported that. This is kind of the beginning and we're going towards the end of this project now in terms of the sense of place initiative and having raised the money and building this cultural center. So I'm with you all and I will post the zone change. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Council Member Savigny. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I too am troubled and it's mostly mostly because of this theme a goal five because I think this is the exact situation ensuring equitable development and rectifying Lexington segregation by race and socioeconomic socioeconomic status caused by historic planning practices and policies we forced these people to live in a particular place in Lexington they were not given a choice they have moved there they invested there they have made that that sense of place their home and and my hats are off to you I'm sorry about what happened 70 years ago but there are things that we can do to rectify certain things and this would be to me one of them so I am NOT in favor of doing this either I do think that the developer has an opportunity to develop a denser product though by right he he or she can develop a townhouse townhome community there that will be denser than what is being proposed but you know but it is not something that would probably have the same effect as this on your community so I am NOT going to agree to this zone change and I wouldn't I would I would encourage my colleagues to think similarly, thank you. Thank you, council member Reynolds. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just want to say a few words about how, first of all, how conflicted I feel in these zone change hearings for various reasons. And the reality is that there's a huge need for affordable housing and that mobile home units are affordable for a lot of people. I have a lot of friends and people that I know that live in the adjacent mobile home park. And I know that for them, that housing is very important. And so for me to think of not supporting an expansion of that is very challenging because I know that that need exists. And so we need affordable housing. We've said that over and over and over. And affordable housing comes in a lot of different shapes and sizes. So I first want to state that and say that I do believe that. I also believe that Lexington is feeling the pains and the growth that we have to have for infill and that this piece of land is a place for infill. So that if this does not pass, that there will need to be development on this property. It might be townhomes or something else, but I just want the neighborhood to know but that that's a reality. That being said, I understand 100% the reason why this neighborhood does not want this development, based on their history, based on the property values, concerns, and the change to the community. I also have heard many, many people reach out and explain their concern for this particular property. And I think that we need to look at M1P a lot further in Lexington, how we want to use it or not use it. And I will be voting against this this evening because I support the people that came out tonight and I feel like their concerns are valid. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Lynch. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Try not to get emotional, but this is an emotional issue because it's my neighbors. I just want to first thank everyone for your participation tonight. I know this journey has been long, it has meant for a lot of neighborhood meetings and community meetings and advocacy dating back starting this summer. And I just want to thank everyone for participating in whatever way you participated, whether it was just sending emails or having conversations or sending text messages or phone calls. This is the kind of advocacy that I love to see, and I'm just very, very proud. I'm very, very proud of my neighbors for their advocacy and for actively engaging and participating in this process. It's complicated and complex and confusing. But you all have stayed the course and held all of our feet to the fire. And I am just really appreciative of everything that you've done throughout the course of this journey for you all, this fight for you all. I thank my colleagues for having willing and open ears and hearts to my neighbors, to everyone, the applicants included tonight, And for agreeing to be here tonight, because you didn't have to be here tonight. We could have easily not made quorum, but you were here because you're dedicated to this job and to our community. So I appreciate that, colleagues. And so I will stand with my District 2 neighbors because what we have in District 2 in St. Martin's Village is extremely special. And I support them 100%. I appreciate all that they do to make District 2 and that corner of District 2 an amazing space for all of our neighbors of all ages. And so I will stand in support and vote no on this zone change as well and would be happy to entertain a motion with the assistance of Tracy Jones, I believe. Put forward a motion with the assistance of Tracy Jones. Okay. So, Councilmember Lynch, in this process, we're going to essentially finish our closed hearing discussion, and then I'm going to call specifically for a motion of findings of fact, and then we'll do the underlying ordinance. Thank you. Thank you. Colleagues, neighbors, This has been a really tough one for me to think about too because I'm coming at it from the lens of really thinking about housing in Lexington. We have a housing crisis and particularly we have an affordable housing crisis. And my default position is to put every tool in the toolbox to make that happen, to build housing at all levels, but particularly affordable and workforce. But what makes this particular situation different and unique in a lot of ways is you all, is the neighborhood that this development touches. Your communities have been hit consciously, on purpose, systematically, systemically, with historic inequities, with redlining, with deed restrictions, with government mandated segregation, with literally the lack of ability to own housing, with racist county clerks that would erase your names from the records and suddenly you don't own a house anymore. And so there's a lot of history there. And so I am for repair, I am for restitution, I am for reparations. But the question I want to ask us to think about is, do we do it at the expense of potentially locking out the next generation of folks who are trying to get into any level of housing right now and locking out that building of wealth that was able to happen in the 50s and generations on? And I'm asking it really as a question. I hate that this situation sometimes feels like an either or, that you either build affordable housing, you either put more people into housing, help them build wealth, or you're doing damage to existing neighborhoods, those who have been done damage to historically for decades and decades, right? I hate that this discussion does feel like an either or. I feel like I wish we had on the table something that didn't take from one to give to another. And unfortunately, this may be the reality that we live in. This is probably going to be, for me, the hardest vote that I've taken at a zone change hearing. And it's made me question a lot of my priorities. Not values, but priorities. And I very, very much appreciate not only the presenters who made their case, who told us the nitty-gritty, the law, the zoning, all of that stuff, but I think more impactfully was you all coming out and telling your stories and your histories and what it was like growing up and what this neighborhood means to you in a time where there were no other options. where this was the path so i very much appreciate you all and i thank you for your your stories council member baxter thank you vice mayor um i think i want to start by by thanking the developer because you did bring us a proposal that would provide housing and i appreciate that but more importantly i want to thank the neighborhood because you guys have represented your neighborhood in a way that like I think most of us wish that we lived in a neighborhood like yours. It's like a storybook neighborhood you know like you just everybody knows everybody and you take care of one another and it's wonderful. Didn't start that way but y'all sure made the best of it. You know, all my colleagues have said that we are tasked with the impossible sitting up here. We know that we need to provide housing. Like we know that, we know it to our core. But I think that really what stands out to me most to me most is that this is a zone change you know usually we're sitting up here and we know we don't approve a development plan we approve an appropriate zone that's our task up here and then it's back to the planning commission on what the final development plan ends up looking like i'm having a really hard time thinking that a more restrictive zone is appropriate in a time where where we need more housing. Yeah. So I am always the council member who sits up here and votes in favor of infill projects because I think they're very, very important and I want to educate the community on just the importance of infill. But like Vice Mayor said, like it's really hard to take from one to give to another. And so with that. I will not be supporting this zone change either. I think that it's really, really important to protect our past. And so I think we can do better with this piece of property. So that's all I've got. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Vice Mayor. When you get a 7-1 approval from the Planning Commission, Usually you think that it's going to be one that you're going to be thinking that you're going to be supporting. But this is not a hard one for me. After listening to the neighborhood, I'm not going to be supportive of it. I think something probably will happen. We have a certain quorum here. We try to keep that underhand. I do appreciate the applause, though. I won't deny that. But I think there's something will happen. But this is not what is appropriate. I always try to put myself in the situation of the people who are going to be most affected by it, because they're the ones who are going to have to be dealing with it on a day-to-day basis. And in this situation, the neighbors have spoken. And if I'm going to be a representative for my community, I have to listen to what the neighbors say. And it's an easy vote for me, and I will not be supporting it. Thank you. Thank you. Any other discussion from my colleagues up here? All right, so before we move on to motions, we've been at this for another hour and a half now. I'm going to call for a quick recess to give our planning team time to draft up. Findings of fact, so let's go ahead and recess. We'll come back at 1010 and we should hopefully be wrapping this up very soon. Thank you all so much for your patience. We're recessed. Thank you. . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right, folks, let's get settled. I'm going to call this hearing back into session. Thank you all so much for hanging in with us. I promise you we are at the home stretch. All right, so we're to the point of the evening now. We're going to first make a motion on the findings of fact, either to support what the Planning Commission has sent us or to offer alternative findings of fact. Once that vote is taken, then we're going to do a couple of readings on the underlying evidence and then we're going to vote for that. So at this point, I'd like to call on Council Member Lynch. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Because I am not in agreement with the zone change, I move to adopt the following findings of fact, in support of disapproval of zone map amendment request PLN MAR24-00010, FAD MHCLP, located at 421 Price Road for a mobile home park M1P zone. Number one, the proposed zone change is not in compliance with the Imagine Lexington 2045 comprehensive plan, because it does not respect the context and design features of areas surrounding the development project. Specifically, the single family residential zone for the St. Martin's Village neighborhood. Theme A, go to, objective B. Number two, the proposed zone change does not accommodate the demand for housing in Lexington because it does not prioritize higher density but proposes lower density than what the existing zone allows without a mixture of housing types theme a goal one objective B and then three the proposed mobile home park m1p zone does not provide a mix of housing types that that is context sensitive to the st. martin's village community or its historical significance Theme A, go to objective B. And number four, the existing zone remains appropriate. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion itself? Council Member Ellinger. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Tracy Jones, since this is going to be different because it was approval and it takes eight votes to overturn it, could you kind of go through the voting, make sure that if you vote accordingly how it makes your because we always kind of get sometimes it's backwards on how we do these yes um what you all are voting on right now are findings that would support a disapproval of this zone change and the reason that you're doing that is because the recommendation you received from the planning commission was for approval and so the findings that are contained in that recommendation are for approval so if you want to disapprove this zone change you have to have different findings so that's what your that's the motion that council member lynch just made that you're getting ready to address depending on the outcome of that vote if you all vote if you vote yes that you want to adopt those findings of disapproval then you will have to give a new first reading to the ordinance which is merely the title but it will say as amended so that it the record reflects that you have amended what was provided to you with disapproval, then you will have to suspend your rules and give it a second reading tonight as amended. And when you take the final vote on that ordinance, you'll have to vote no because it's written in the positive to adopt the zoning ordinance. So at all turns, you have to have eight votes. If you don't, then whatever you're voting on doesn't go forward. And if you take no further action, the Planning Commission's recommendation would stand. All right, thank you, Ms. Jones. Any other discussion on the underlying, or on the findings of fact motion? All right, clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please? Sorry. Council Member Baxter? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Fogle? Yes. Council Member Legree? Yes. Council Member Lynch? Yes. Council Member Plumman? Yes. Council Member Reynolds? Yes. Council Member Savigny? Yes. Council Member Sheehan? Yes. Vice Mayor Wu? Yes. Council Member Fred Brown? No. And Council Member Allinger? Yes, ma'am. Thank you. All right, thank you. that motion passes. At this time, I would like to ask for a first read of the amended ordinance. An ordinance changing the zone from a single-family residential R1D zone to a mobile home park M1P zone for 16.541 net, 16.754 gross acres for property located at 421 Price Road, a portion of Fayette MHCLP, Council District 2, as amended. Thank you. Now I will entertain a motion to Suspend the rules and give the second reading. So moved. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Okay, we have one no. All right, so clerk, if you would, give that second reading, please. In originating the zone from a single-family residential R1D zone to a mobile home park BIM 1P zone for 16.4%. 541 net, 16.754 gross acres for property located at 421 Price Road, a portion of Fayette MHCLP, Council District 2 as amended. Thank you. Can I get a motion to approve? Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on this motion? Alright, before I call for the roll call vote, I'm going to ask Tracy Jones to give us one more point of clarity on what a yes vote means and what a no vote means on this particular item. Okay, you all have now adopted findings of fact that would support a disapproval of this zone change. This ordinance, you have noted it's been amended with those findings of fact, but it still reads in the positive. So when you're asked to vote, you would need to vote no if you're trying to disapprove this zone change. Any questions on that? Okay, thank you very much. Can we have a roll call vote please? Council Member Baxter? No. Council Member Fogle? No. Council Member Legree? No. Council Member Lynch? No. Council Member Plowman? No. Council Member Reynolds? No. Council Member Sevigny? No. Council Member Sheehan? No. Vice Mayor Wu? No. Councilmember Fred Brown? Yes. And Councilmember Ellinger? No, ma'am. All right, thank you. Thank you. That motion passes. Thank you all so much for coming out tonight, spending your evening with us. We are adjourned. you