# Planning Commission Work Session - October 30, 2025 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Commission · October 30, 2025 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6604 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6604?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2025-10-30 - **Body**: Commission - **Last revised**: February 3, 2026 - **Length**: 19,592 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Planning Commission convened for a meeting covering 7 agenda items, all of which were informational in nature. No specific date, time, location, or presiding officer information is available for this session. The meeting was entirely informational, with no motions made, no votes taken, and no public comments recorded. Topics addressed spanned a range of planning and development subjects, including tree cost sharing, industrial revenue bonds, two master plan updates, neighborhood engagement, analytic research, and legal reminders. ## Attendance The following members were present at the October 30, 2025 Commission meeting: - Mr. Wilson - Mr. Duncan - Mr. Davis - Mr. Mickler - Ms. Gleason - Ms. Worth **Absent:** Larry Forrester, Frank Penn No members arrived late. ## Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program [timestamp: 17:10] The Commission held a discussion on the Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program, with Commissioner Worth and Boyd identified as the key speakers on this item. The discussion centered on several issues affecting the program's effectiveness. A primary concern raised was the lack of public knowledge regarding tree-related ordinances — suggesting that residents and potentially developers may not be fully aware of the rules governing street trees. Improper planting practices were also highlighted as a significant problem, indicating that trees are not always being installed in ways that meet program or safety standards. The conversation also touched on the question of incentives for developers to preserve existing trees, reflecting broader concerns about how development activity may impact the urban tree canopy and what mechanisms might encourage better outcomes. The item was informational in nature, and no formal action or vote was taken as a result of the discussion. ## Industrial Revenue Bonds [timestamp: 40:13] Mr. Atkins delivered a presentation on the use of industrial revenue bonds (IRBs) for housing purposes. The presentation was informational in nature and covered the mechanics of how these bonds function in a housing context, with a particular focus on affordable and workforce housing applications. Mr. Atkins explained the leaseback model associated with industrial revenue bonds, walking commissioners through the process and criteria involved in obtaining them. The presentation outlined how this financing mechanism can be applied to housing development projects. The item was presented for informational purposes, and no formal action was taken by the Commission. ## Blue Sky Master Plan Update [timestamp: 1:02:13] Sam Castro presented an update on the Blue Sky Master Plan, focusing on recent community engagement efforts and the feedback gathered from local businesses and residents. Castro's presentation covered ongoing outreach activities conducted as part of the planning process. Key themes emerging from community feedback included concerns around **lighting**, **security**, and **utility failures** — issues raised by both local business owners and residents engaged during the process. The item was informational in nature, with no vote or formal action taken by the Commission. ## Downtown Master Plan Update [timestamp: 1:19:04] Boyd presented an update on the Downtown Master Plan during this informational agenda item. The presentation focused on two primary areas: the status of community engagement efforts and the emerging themes being identified through that process. According to Boyd, the themes surfacing from community engagement include: - **Safety** - **Housing** - **Transportation** Boyd described the overall goal of the Master Plan as producing a realistic and actionable strategy for downtown development, emphasizing that the plan is intended to be implementable rather than aspirational in nature. The item was informational, and no vote or formal action was taken by the Commission. ## Neighborhood Voices [timestamp: 1:30:27] Quinn Mulholland presented an overview of the Neighborhood Voices initiative, describing it as an effort focused on building trust and engaging communities in the planning process. The initiative is currently in a pilot phase, with the Smithtown neighborhood serving as the pilot project location. The presentation was informational in nature. No vote or formal action was taken on this item. ## Imagine Lexington Analytic Research Center [timestamp: 2:05:14] Hal Bailey presented an overview of the Imagine Lexington Analytic Research Center, with a focus on data transparency and public engagement as core functions of the center. The presentation was informational in nature, with Bailey describing the center's role in providing updated data and reports intended to inform planning decisions. The center appears designed to serve as a resource for making planning-related information more accessible and current for both decision-makers and the public. No vote or formal action was taken as a result of this presentation. ## Legal Reminders [timestamp: 2:12:08] Tracy Jones delivered legal reminders to the commission, covering two primary areas of concern: adherence to statutory processes and the avoidance of bias in decision-making. Jones emphasized the importance of commissioners following established statutory procedures in their work, underscoring that proper process is a foundational requirement for the commission's actions to withstand legal scrutiny. She also cautioned commissioners to be mindful of bias, reminding them that decisions must be made fairly and without predetermined conclusions. Additionally, Jones highlighted the need for commissioners to exercise caution in their communications, suggesting that how commissioners correspond — whether publicly or privately — can have legal implications for the commission's proceedings. The item was informational in nature, and no formal action was taken. --- ## Full transcript 1. Ydych chi'n meddwl, ar y tôn 5, yma, y byddai'r cyfrin cyrraedd yma'n ymwneud â'r cyfrin sy'n dod o'r bwl? 2. Ydych chi'n meddwl, ar y tôn 7, y byddai'r cyfrin cyrraedd yma'n ymwneud â'r cyfrin cyfrin sy'n dod o'r bwl? 3. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 4. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 5. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 6. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 7. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 8. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 9. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 10. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 11. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 12. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 13. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 14. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 15. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 16. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 17. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 18. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 19. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 20. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 21. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 22. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 23. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 24. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 25. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 26. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 27. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 28. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 29. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 30. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 31. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 32. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 33. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 34. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 35. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 36. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 37. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 38. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 39. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 40. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 41. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 42. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 43. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 44. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 45. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 46. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 47. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 48. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 49. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 50. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 51. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 52. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 53. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 54. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 55. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 56. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 57. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 58. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 59. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 60. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 61. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 62. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 63. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 64. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 65. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 66. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 67. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 68. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 69. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 70. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 70. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 71. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 72. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 73. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 74. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 75. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 75. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 76. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 77. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 78. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 79. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 80. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 91. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 92. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 93. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 94. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 95. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 10. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? 10. Ydych chi'n meddwl y bydd y cyfrin yma'n dod o'r bwl? Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Hazard Street Tree Cost Share Program Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Improper Planting Improper Planting Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Lack of Ordinance Knowledge Thank you. What will your role, or how will you be involved with the downtown plan that's happening right now along with Boyd's leadership? I mean, does it extend to looking at if there are trees proposed, will you look at the species, that sort of thing, or are you already involved with that? Yes. Great, thanks. Commissioner Worth. I'm trying to think of how to ask this. This is really more of a legislative question, but I would be interested to hear your reaction. Obviously, we've been involved in lots of conversations with you and with the developers about removal of trees that shouldn't be removed, but what we also see are clear cuts of property before they ever get to the development stage. And so I wonder if you all are aware of legislative efforts in other locations where they incentivize developers to preserve their trees before it ever comes to development, or other legislative things that have been done to protect those trees before they get a fence around them to tear things down. I think that that is something that we're trying to work through in the ZOTA process here locally. I'm not aware of any state legislation that addresses that. Boyd, do you have a comment on that? Or other communities? Right now in our zoning ordinance, Article 26, the incentives if you preserve existing trees, that goes towards I think 1.5 of your canopy requirements. It's 1.5 per tree you preserve. We are working with Eric and DES to improve on that, and hopefully we will be before you discussing this within the next few months. And is that preserve once you've announced you're going to develop it, or is that preserve before it gets to that stage? So it's both. So if you say you're preserving it, you use it for your canopy calculations. Then when you are developing, it's a requirement by Article 26 that trees that stay will stay within that tree-protected area, and you cannot do anything within that area unless Eric gives you permission. And as for the other communities that do it, a lot of communities do this. We are using, I think, Austin, Texas. I wasn't prepared for this, but yeah, we are looking at other communities that do this. There are communities that actually do protect their trees. And I think what you're alluding to is a look back. Like once they hand in the plan, they've already cut the trees down. So what Boyd's talking about is we're trying to throw them an incentive that if you preserve these trees, we'll give you a better percentage of canopy coverage, so then you have to plant fewer trees. The look back is something that we have been in kind of behind-the-scenes discussions on how we can address that through an ordinance. But I don't have any better information at this time on that. Okay, do we have any other questions? If not, then... Here, sorry about that. I do love the idea of incentivizing developers to protect what is perceived of value by these guys. And they can make an effort to do so if those accommodations meet their requirements. If not, they'll have to deliver to keep tree canopy in another way. But, for example, a giant oak tree on Harrodsburg Road that's a couple hundred years old, to be preserved, and preserving it generates a benefit to the developer, is a great idea to have them protect these assets and make sure that they are protected so that they can receive the benefits that they're talking about. I was going to just ask, or make a comment, really, sort of... One thing that, you know, I appreciate the presentation, and I agree with most things. One thing, though, is when I see a hundred-year-old tree outgrow its spot, I think I look at that as a success, not the wrong tree, wrong place. To me, I look at that as this was a right tree that succeeded in this spot for a hundred years, and it did reach a point, maybe, where it outgrew it, but it provided a lot of services for those hundred years. And I see people fear large trees a lot and put small trees that are never going to provide those same services in those spots. And so, I guess, just one comment on that. Yeah, we may see some large trees outgrow these five-foot medians, but they certainly do well for a long time. Thank you, Robin. So, yes, we want those to last, but per ordinance, technically, you need seven feet for those trees. Now, we didn't have those parameters back when that neighborhood was developed, and yes, that whole stretch of Maxwell, in between Euclid and Maxwell, has gigantic old trees that are too big for the space, but they did provide amazing services, and still are providing amazing services. The thing that we, you know, when I get a permit request for a large, for a space that's suitable for a large tree, I'm always going to recommend that they go back with a large tree, just because of what you said, over the next few decades, and hopefully more. It's going to give us greater benefits. However, you know, they can choose a large, small, or medium species. And so, ultimately, you know, as Bruce is talking about, that's the private citizen. They have a choice to make. I don't necessarily want to impose, you know, my draconian will, you're going to put a large tree, even though I do heavily influence, you know, I try to influence that decision by saying we would prefer a large tree, but they could put a small tree there. So, you know, there's many ways to look at it. I appreciate it. Okay. Just one real quick comment about that. When we see these giant trees that are affecting sidewalks, I think we ought to protect the tree and spend a little bit of the money that we have in the sidewalk fund to design appropriately. So if someone is cited for a sidewalk block because of a giant tree, we could maybe provide a quick design that can then go along with that sidewalk repair that can preserve the tree, because I would rather see, you know, we're looking at an old sidewalk plan with three-foot sidewalks. We need to go to five-foot sidewalks, but that's all well and good. The benefit of that tree being there, I think, in my mind, supersedes the need for compliant sidewalks. I am not a sidewalk fan, Bruce, but, you know, it's interesting. There are certain parts of town where, like Arcadia Park, for example, if you walk through that neighborhood, there are snaking little sidewalks that go around where there used to be oak trees and Shady Lane. In fact, there's a person over there. I've got a picture. I didn't have enough time and slides, but I had some good pictures of those workarounds, and I agree. If you go to places like in the Carolinas where live oaks are, you know, the thing that you cannot mess with, the sidewalks are all messed up. I mean, they do not, you know, that's a hazard in and of itself, but they put the emphasis on the tree and not the infrastructure. So it's an interesting dynamic, and I'm all for creative design. And just to add to that, the tree board, we identified some strategic priorities for this year, and the relationship between sidewalks and trees is one of the items we will be discussing this year. So we'll certainly appreciate your comments and suggestions as we consider those things, and we now have a feedback form on our tree board page so anyone in the community can bring up any tree issues that we might want to address. Add one other request in the education. That phrase used to be right tree, right location, and right care. We lost the right care piece, and I'm thinking, and I'm guilty of this myself, of not having an arborist come out and do anything to my tree until I got a problem, and the notion that trees need preventive care, and that a lot of what we can do to get rid of some extra limbs and do some other things will not only lengthen the life of that tree, but reduce the likelihood it's going to come down on your house. I think there's some promotion work we need to do there too. We actually, the pie team, put together a beautiful tree care pamphlet. It goes out in all the new homeowner packets, and it does. It's got a street tree little card you pull out that talks specifically about street trees, but it talks about how to properly prune, how to properly mulch, how to water, and all those things. So that maintenance is always a big issue. Okay. Thank you all very much. We very much appreciate it. Trees touch just about everything we do on the planning commission. All righty. Our second item on the agenda is we are going to hear about industrial revenue bonds from Mr. Atkins in the mayor's office. Well, good afternoon, everybody. So this is an effort that Craig Benz in our office and I have been working on for a little bit more than a year, and the council gave final approval to it just about a month ago to look at how do we use industrial revenue bonds to assist with housing. We got into this conversation, and two or three months after we got into it, the state introduced legislation kind of going on the same realm. They passed their bill, and ours mirrors that pretty well. So industrial revenue bonds in their nature are to assist with economic development. They were primarily used in the early days to help industries build at a much cheaper rate than they could otherwise get conventional loans for. These bonds, the industrial revenue bonds, this is a key point, are not general obligations of the urban county government or an indebtedness of the government. We are basically a conduit to the financing. It helps the borrower get a rate closer to ours, which according to our commissioner of finance is roughly 2%, worth about 2% savings in doing them. We see these requests primarily to, we'll see them for non-profits for that first point so they can get a lower interest rate. The other one, and when I discuss this, think about the Manchester Hotel down in the distillery district. They're interested in what is called a lease back. We essentially take title, if you will, to the dirt. It's just on paper, and then the property for the period of the bond comes off the property tax roll. The applicant has worked with the other taxing agencies in relation to the taxes that would have been paid on that. But the lease back model is primarily, when we went in and looked recently, that's what we were primarily looking at. So we spent the time looking over the policies and guidelines. We had never really had housing under those, and so it's something that the mayor asked us to take a look at. It is an economic development program, so we did maintain the job creation component and requirement. So if you think about, Jim, the town center model, that is kind of what we had in mind when we started looking at this, kind of that whole concept. Or if you look at the Met down on Midland, that concept where you had businesses on the first level, apartments on the upper level. The other thing the mayor asked us to do in this is when we – so under the policies previously, if you wanted to look at housing, you had to do it primarily, and we've got a map in just a second in the downtown area. She was interested with the expansion area, making sure, as some of the communities in northern Kentucky had done, that we made it available to a broader area. So as we said, we do two types. We do traditional IRBs. Traditional IRBs, think of a bank loan. I mean, that's essentially what it is except you're selling a bond. And the lease back is where it comes off the PVA roll. When you do that, it does require what's called a payment in lieu of taxes, which you have to then go to the school system, the library, and negotiate with them on a level of payment over that time. So part of the process, we put together an internal working group of the government. Commissioner Horn was part of that group representing planning to really take a look at the process. Craig and I then met with our partners in the taxing districts to talk about their feelings on this because they really put a lot of money in this when you're talking about property taxes and schools and the library. We then went out and met with the building industry folks and got their input on it. After we did all that, we worked with our economic development investment board making the changes on that board. We've got attorneys and bankers and developers, quite frankly, and we have one attorney who specializes in economic development. That board approved this, and then it was approved by council. We also had a broader community group that was involved in this as well that we put together after we kind of took it to the initial industry representative folks. As I say that, now you can see. On the left, you see all the people from internal to LFUCG that were involved in this process. On the right side, a lot of the folks that you all are used to seeing were involved as external partners with that, and J.D. Cheney from the League of Cities because they do bonding, but they also have city legal reps who know this from a legal standpoint was the chair of that committee for us to walk us through it. So here's where we are. We are going to use the leaseback model for housing, and that is done with direct input from our partners. When we do this, we kind of followed the planning staff. We took an idea from Jim and Hal and team. We now ask the applicant to come in ahead of time and talk to us, and we take a look at it. We then will coordinate a meeting with our taxing district partners to talk about the proposal. If they want to move forward with us, then we have the applicant go start the pilot agreement negotiation with them. If you have one that does not want to participate, we tell them you can't go talk to this one, or we met and our partners are just not wanting. So after those negotiations on the pilot agreements are complete, then the person can actually come back and file an official application. We'll review all that. Craig's finished up the revised application. That will then go to the Economic Development Investment Board for approval and then ultimately the council. And, again, those are not general obligation bonds. They are indebtedness to the applicant. If the applicant defaults, the bondholders become the owner. The urban county government has no responsibility for payment or anything related to the bond. So here's kind of where we went. We wanted to focus on two things, affordable housing, which we all know a lot about, and workforce housing. So to get the lease back, this does not pertain to just a traditional IRB. To get a traditional IRB, you do not have to meet these two categories. But if you want the full benefit of the lease back model, the partners putting money back in, these are the criteria. So if you are looking at affordable housing, 20% of the units being built have to be in that 80 below AMI. And you can get a 15-year term on the bond for that. If you want to do workforce housing, 80.1 to 120% of AMI, then 20% of the units have to be workforce. I will tell you, everybody was supportive of the affordable, but a couple of our partners really liked the workforce housing because they felt it helped them in recruitment of younger personnel. It helped them get the students coming right out of UK involved in their employment. So I mentioned earlier, Tracy helped Craig find the map on your left. That's where the previous model allowed you to do a housing-related IRB. You can see how much better maps are today than they were about 30 or 40 years ago. But it was not a big area. The mayor felt it was important to do this for everything inside the urban services boundary. Now, the one thing I will mention is when we did this, we noted the state requirements because I don't want to get this confused with the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. This program requires 40 units or more, which mirrors the state language. Obviously, what Director McQuadey does is it can be that big or it can be smaller. These are two separate and distinct programs. Now, Charlie Lanner, who's the Commissioner of Housing, you all probably know, and I have already talked to at least one client who there is not a problem using both funds, actually. So they're not exclusive. It's not a case where you can do one and not do the other if it works. But this program requires 40 units or more. So I think keeping in mind the key components, A, this has no impact whatsoever on the commitment or the operation of the Affordable Housing Fund that has been successfully used in this community for years. And one of the things when we met with the developers on this, it's not a one-size-fits-all model. And I forget which one of them said it, but this is just another tool to assist with some of the development. But it's been a good effort. We've had a lot of good input along the way. And so Craig and I are both here if you all have questions. All righty. Thank you, Mr. Atkins. Do we have any questions on this agenda item? Yes, sir. Thank you for the presentation. He's not here, so I'm going to speak for him. But Larry Forrester is our resident banker, and he has expressed concerns on more than one occasion that with developments such as this having a requirement to have the mixed-use part of it. He says there's a difficulty in getting the mixed-use developments fully leased out. And I wonder if there was any pushback from the partners or from the builders about having a mixed-use requirement. No, not really. I mean, in fact, one comment was that if you kind of look at the expansion area, that town center model is kind of where things are progressing. And if you notice, we did not put a specific – we didn't say you had to create 100 jobs. But it is an economic development program at its heart. And so there was – you know, we took a long look. And if you look at the MET, if you look at Townley Center, because you think about Townley's got all the restaurants and retail there and some apartments – I'm not talking about the housing that's there now. Those are the models. And I think the other side is you can keep in mind what I said. If you don't want those requirements, we also gave you the avenue to do the traditional model, which equates to many. Now, we've got some builders that are big enough. They can get a rate probably close to what we can get them, candidly. But we gave you the option to go a route where you could still get a reduced rate. Okay. Do we have any other questions? Yes, Mr. McQueen. You said at the heart this is an economic development. But none of the requirements or incentives have to do with pay or the type of job. Is that correct? That's right. It is tied to job creation. What we were interested in, and this is putting all kinds of jobs in, we have incentive programs that are tied to hiring and paying jobs. We have put wage requirements in the development of the Legacy Business Park, quite frankly. But in this one, where you're also talking about affordable housing and you want jobs of all types close by, we did not tie a specific wage to this. We tried to do this in a way, and Craig, jump in if you want to, where we had the requirement, but we also had built-in flexibility. As a layperson, how is workforce housing different from affordable housing? So affordable housing, you go back to the – So affordable housing is you take a look at the area median income. So we use the same model that the Affordable Housing Fund uses, and Commissioner Lanner helped us put that together. So it is for folks that have 80% of the average median income or below. Workforce housing is that next step up. That's why it's 80.1, 80 to 120% of that number, which gets them into kind of that average price range of apartment units in Lexington. I'm a little slow in this area. We're in territory I know almost nothing about. In terms of the economic development question that you guys were referring to, I'm not clear on how the housing construction relates to the economic development. Is this we create jobs for people building houses? Are we creating jobs in the area? Are we building in locations where there are jobs? Yeah, I mean, that's a great question. You've got to think of it from the component of the program. It's an industrial revenue bond program. It is an economic development program that is now being able to use a portion of that program for housing. And then you can also take a look at the second one down there. When you're talking about workforce housing, when we're working with companies about locating or looking at expanding housing for those workers, is a very important part of that equation. Absolutely. So it is an economic development program. I'm just trying to figure out, you know, when we look at the ED zone out around Newtown Pike, we know that X amount of it has to go to industrial or commercial use, and then it's got housing with it. I'm trying to figure out if the land is defined in a way that those jobs are going to be there on that property. I think it's a good idea. I just don't understand it. It will be tied to a site. Okay. I think if this helps you picture it a little bit better, when we worked with the professional soccer team about their stadium, if they choose to come back, it's not a housing model, obviously. But if they choose to come back, they can have an industrial revenue bond. That was part of their economic incentive to locate. When we did that, it is very much defined where that would be. In that agreement, it's tied to the stadium itself and the medical staff building that would support that, along with the team office. In this case, it would be tied to their development plan. Okay. So there's going to be – that's why Commissioner Horn was involved in this. There's going to be a lot of intertwining. At times, it may be our Commissioner of Housing. It may be Commissioner Horn. It may be both. We designed it much like we designed our public infrastructure fund, which gives us the ability to take a look at somebody's application, and like Commissioner Albright and Director Burton, end up seeing almost all of those applications, for example, because it gets into the engineering on the project. So this was set up so we could kind of grab the expertise, if you will, across government. So one other question, and this, again, goes to financing, which Bruce or somebody else in the flesh not here needs some help with. One of the things, when we heard the presentation on affordable housing and we got a little bit of information about the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, it appeared that although that's – you know, we're all supportive of that, that the quantity of housing that can be built through that funding model, we're never going to get our housing needs met that way. And we've been struggling with the question, how do we scale up? You said a minute ago this process has no impact on the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. I want to ask the question the opposite way. Is there a way to use the Affordable Housing Trust Fund linked with this process to scale up the production of affordable housing? Yeah, that's what I meant earlier when I said there was no exclusion on going both. I already talked to somebody about the potential. Commissioner Noyenter and I had a conversation with somebody about the potential to do that. I thought that's what you meant, but I wanted to confirm that. Okay, thanks. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Atkins. Yes, sir. I hope I can make this make sense. He's not here either. Frank Penn, I'm going to invoke him. I know, right? It's been nice being with you all. Right? You know I'm going with this. On more than one occasion he's talked about how he was successful in getting his project, PDR, done by using, I guess, a bonding mechanism. And he wanted to know was there a way to do housing in a similar way. And could that be done using this proposed program? Was it something totally different or a different avenue than what he was talking about? You know, you would need to talk to Commissioner Hensley about the overall thought of bonding for housing. But you could not under this program. Because industrial revenue bonds are the responsibility of the borrower. The incentive that you're giving them is the lower rate and the tax rebate. I'm not going to say you can't do the other. That's Commissioner Hensley by far is more of an expert on that. And that's a policy question. I will tell you that, you know, we're going to see more looks in Frankfurt in the winter when they go back in in January. There's already some conversation on, you know, they had their housing task force. How do we kind of help offset some of those costs? We'll see what comes out of that. And, you know, this ended up being, thanks to Senator Millsville, a really good partnership on something we were looking at. And he was obviously thinking of the same thing. And it provided that clarity and assistance to be able to move it forward. So we'll see what they do. But I can't give you an answer on the bonding that's in the finance world. Yeah. All righty. Thank you, Mr. Atkins. Our next item on the agenda is the Blue Sky Master Plan update with Sam Castro. Too tall for me, Kevin. Okay, folks. So I'm just here for a fairly quick update. It will not be the full 30 minutes on where we stand with Blue Sky to date. So we had a very exciting outing a few weeks ago. We got to basically have an entire day of engagement out in the Blue Sky area. I have to give a huge amount of kudos to Eve, who's not here, Quinn, Espy, the planning folks, for going out and literally going door to door and ensuring that everybody out in the parkway, all the employees and employers, knew that we were going to be having a big barbecue event out there and focus groups and inviting them to come out and to also to take a survey with us. So that really helped draw a lot of people to this barbecue. It was a great event. We had them do some activities while they waited in line. That was the tradeoff. We give you free food, we give you red state, and you have to participate a little bit. So they did not mind that. And Elliot provided a wonderful space out there, so we just set up. I'm sure if Chris Avelia was here, he would make a joke about Blue Skies for the Blue Sky project. But, yeah, it was a really wonderful day. We got to hear a lot of interesting feedback from both employees and employers and business owners out there. So we got a really good wide range, some of which was somewhat conflicting, which is what we kind of love to hear. We like the constraints of engagement. We also that evening went to the Old Richmond Road Neighborhood Association meeting. They have one once a year. And so this was their big to-do. And, you know, it actually went really well. I know that they've had some complaints in the past about maybe some of the R cuts. So I think we came in a little bit wary. But I think for the most part they weren't actually even really aware that Blue Sky is back there, unless they've had to go back there for a window replacement or something like that. So they were just excited to hear the fact that we are hoping to help improve the safety of the roadway and the intersections there at Blue Sky Parkway. Sam, I don't want to break your stride, but go back one slide. Yeah. I wonder if the Planning Commission recognizes your former cohort there on the far right, Mike Cravens. He came out and spent the whole time with us out there. The whole day. Yes, he was out there for most of the day. And so he's one of the interesting folks that had the option of we don't want anything to change. Like you can see, we had asked folks to mark on the map where they were coming from, where they worked, which gave us a really good idea of we got very mixed reviews, I would say, especially in the area of wanting walkability. We had a lot of folks in what I would say are maybe the more almost like office-type cultures that are out there. The LA folks and some others that really wanted the idea of sidewalks to walk around on their lunch breaks, to walk between buildings on their campuses out there, and then compare and contrast that to other employees and employers that are out there that drive out there to do their job and they're operating big, heavy machinery, big trucks, and their concern, of course, is with conflict points between people and vehicles. So we also asked them to do marble activity where we had 10 different elements to vote on and each person had five marbles and they could drop them in the various buckets or all in one. And we had about 111 people that participated between the barbecue event and then the Old Richmond Road Neighborhood Association meeting. We also made sure to kind of do a count at the barbecue event when we were done before we got to Old Richmond Road so that it wouldn't be skewed too far to one direction or the other so we could tell, and it seemed to just kind of continue along the same lines. As you'll see, the number one ask was for food and retail. You know, if any of you have been out there, there's sort of a lack of restaurants that are available to them or even quick-grab places. Most people either have to bring their lunch or they have the option of, like, McDonald's, Wendy's, or Merchimex, which is a combo Indian-Mexican restaurant, which is actually quite good, but that's sort of it. Or they have to drive all the way into Richmond Road or out to Hamburg, which you don't typically have the time to do, you know, when you're working a shift job. As you can see, though, second really came the sort of parks, trails, and seating. You know, I think there's the quality of life aspect to the responses that really had to do a lot with, yes, we come here and we do our job, but it would also be really nice if we could, you know, step away from the job for a few minutes. So we took that into account. Third place was a tie between utilities and connectivity. So utilities, we heard some interesting responses that we didn't necessarily pick up on the existing conditions, talking about failures in the power grid that impacted them quite frequently, actually, that it could be a beautiful sunny day out and a lot of the businesses would lose power for the whole day. And, you know, that's just not tenable and not something that you can do when you're in an industrial zone. Lighting and security is another big factor. There really isn't street lighting or anything of the sort out there. So I think the security factor has a lot more to do with security of property than it does of, you know, personal security because there aren't – you have to know to go out there to go out there, but also they know that there's nobody out there. Yeah, some of them do – some of the – like there's a truck repair place that repairs refrigerator trucks, and so they are 24 hours because if your refrigerator truck breaks down, you need to fix it right away. So those guys are out there and they said it's, you know, it's pitch black in the middle of the night. I would say, you know, the rest are – were pretty far along in the back. We actually got laughed at a few times with the renewable energy question, but the old Richmond Road neighborhood folks voted pretty heavily for that one. The one thing that we didn't factor in was we did not have a do-nothing option, and I was also surprised at the number of people that wanted that as their option. As you can see, we also, you know, we have a survey that we have out, and it's still up on the website and we're kind of encouraging our steering committee or our advisory committee to continue to push that as well as the employees and employers to continue to get feedback probably through the end of November. And it's a good even split of hearing from employees and then hearing from the people that actually own property out there or own businesses out there. And like we said, some of the things that they ranked really highly were the on-site amenities and then also, interestingly enough, workforce training and education partnerships out there, transit service to Blue Sky, which, you know, we pushed for transit service in the Urban Growth Master Plan, so this is a continuation of that that would make sense, and then sidewalks, trails, or bike facilities. And again, the Urban Growth Master Plan pushes for those trail connections all the way out to Cane Break, which is just the next intersection over from Blue Sky. So the idea is to continue it. Whether or not we have people that would actually bike out there today is one thing, but the idea is, you know, if Area 3 started to be developed, that is really very close to be able to, you know, to ride a bike or to walk to work. As you can see in terms of the improvements for a better work day, again, street lighting came up there. Food options was number one again. And then we also asked them, like, what, you know, what sort of incentives would help you want to kind of participate in the Blue Sky Small Area Plan, and a lot of it had to do with, you know, small grants or loans for site rehab or for facade or landscaping improvements. The public comment was really interesting. The conversations we had were great, and this is the part of engagement that I love. This is the stuff we can't get just looking at maps and running data, is that a lot of people really stress the fact that they liked Blue Sky because it's secluded, because it's, you know, you get the access and the proximity to Lexington without having to deal with all of that Lexington stuff is what we were told, especially because we anecdotally we kind of found that a lot of folks that we talked to actually reside in Madison County or Scott County or Garrett County. Like, you know, they're coming from other places and working in Blue Sky, so it doesn't necessarily impact them one way or the other to drive into Lexington. So we had kind of an equal comments of the leave it as is versus a lot of people wanting the lighting or the safety, the quality of life, the, you know, kind of making things look a little bit less run down in some areas, you know, concern about traffic and how cars and people and freight all interact. So that is a little bit of where we're at. Thank you, Sam. Water egress. Are they talking about boating? No, I'm pretty sure they're talking about just stormwater flowing off. You know, I mean, it's pretty much a straight pitched impervious site from the grade changes about 100 feet. So from Avon Spoonsboro down, whoops, down to the stream, you know, you're just cheating water for a good part of that. And we did get to hear, you know, we also did get to hear about how much things like the fact that I guess the city, it is not on their snow removal route. So they were telling all these stories about how there's one guy that's got a truck out there, and he has to come and like pull a lot of the office workers out, or they have to walk out to Avon Spoonsboro and try and get an Uber home because they get stuck with the ice. And same thing with the water back by the stream. The cutter court and the areas back in there sometimes are inaccessible because the water will overtop the stream that's in the back, and there's only one egress point in and out of that back half of the site. So those are some really interesting things that we picked up. Mr. Wilson. One quick question about the feedback loop. Once you get all this information in, if I were given that information, how then do I find it? at what you've done with it. Yeah. Well, and so, you know, we, in terms of them finding out what we've done with it, you know, we've, we asked them for their contact information. So they're being, you know, included in, in this and we're planning to, it was pretty successful going out and doing mailings and doing, you know, the, the postcards and getting out in the neighborhood. So our, our idea is that we'll have like another feedback loop once we have this sort of longer range vision. But for us, it was great to hear because, because of those mixed, you know, the mixed feedback that we were getting it, for me, it was interesting because I thought like, oh, well, it's a sort of one size fits all, you know, we'll, we'll just put sidewalks everywhere and everyone will be happy, but that is not, that is not the case. So, you know, it's right now we're working on the frameworks. And so we brought that to the advisory committee this morning and they gave us some of their feedback on what those frameworks are going to look like. And you all will see them, you know, towards the end of the year, early next year the actual concepts that we're developing that take into account all of this feedback that we're hearing. But I think that there's some really good low hanging fruit that is coming from this, that is talking about street lighting, that, that should be an easy one to fix. Wayfinding, signage, branding of the area, you know, just a general aesthetics upgrade because, you know, they're, they're kind of like the, the uncle that comes to Christmas and could use a little bit of a makeover. Yes, Mr. Duncan. Mr. Chair, thank you. Sam, you, you talked about some physical issues that the, that the residents, that the workers out there have said. Did you, could you glean anything about, and maybe they didn't articulate it this way, but that there are some maybe regulatory or policy issues that could also be recommended out of this plan that maybe, and certainly would be something the planning commission would have a role in at some point. And any idea of what those might look like? Yes. Thank you, Jim, for segwaying into that. So one of the, one of the things that we heard from, from multiple different business owners in particular was the fact that our existing industrial zoning is really written for a different time or a different way that we used industry. You know, we have these requirements in there that really dictate the, the sort of level of like warehousing or manufacturing that you're supposed to be doing on site versus like how much office space you're allowed to have. And really in reality, you know, a lot of these businesses want to, want a little bit more flexibility in that mix and what they can do, because I think a lot of them are sort of putting warehousing uses just to fulfill the requirement. When really what they want is the office, Elliott's, Elliott's a great example. They have a lot of administrative things and executive things that need to be done in more of an office setting, but they also have all of their trucks that need to go out and service electrical calls. So they, they need that administrative side of things, but they also need, you know, the, the space for lay down and for, for parking of their, their vehicles. So our current code isn't, isn't allowing that. And we, we heard numerous examples of, of how that works. So that's one thing that we're, that we are going to be looking at again in our industrial code rewrite. So we want to make sure that that can help them where they need, but also so that we're not having unintended consequences with work we're doing in industrial areas elsewhere in the city, like out in Coldstream. You know, we don't want to do something here that then upsets the apple cart in other areas. All right. That was very good, Sam. Do we have any questions on Blue Sky? How much what? Leftovers? How many leftovers do you have? Have you ever seen the gentleman that worked out in Blue Sky? We had very little. They were more than happy to eat as much as they could. Thank you, Sam. Thank you, guys. All righty. Next item on the agenda is the downtown master plan update with Boyd. Okay. A lot of this has been covered. I've been here a few times, so I will go through this real quick. And the whole purpose of this is to update you on the event that happened on October 8th at the Lyric Theater. But before I get to that, I'll just go real quick about some of the background information. And then I'm going to go back to Boyd, and then I'm going to go back to Sam, and then I'll just go real quick about some of the background information, what the downtown area is all about. This is a community-driven plan, and we've been in the community since it started in May. So that's what we are trying to do. These are all the consultants on the team. Earlier on, DES is gone, Eric mentioned that he's talked to the consultants. Urban Forestry is the consultant that's looking into our... ...this through one-on-one communications, through the community meetings, through the surveys. And the nine emerging themes are downtown is a special place. There's a lot of history, there's a lot of culture, and people want to maintain that. Safety in connections. People want downtown to be connected to the neighborhoods. They want a safe and a walkable connection to those areas. And then also for the existing businesses, for them to thrive. Right now, we are approximating there are 4,100 residents in what we consider the downtown area. We are trying to make that grow because that's what will support the businesses and make downtown life continue throughout the day instead of ending at five o'clock when people go home. And then the transportation and infrastructure is also a concern. When it comes to biking, when it comes to public transit, downtown is not as efficient. Now that it's not efficient, people want to see that improve. Then the unhoused population in Lexington. We are looking for ways to support the unhoused community and solve some of the root causes. That was not in the original RFP, but due to all the meetings we have had with the community, people have brought that up time and time again, and now the consultant is looking into that. And also we are trying another theme that emerged was downtown as a gathering place for people. An interesting thing about that was, I think because Gatlin Park just opened, people want to see more green spaces, more parks, but not more big parks like Gatlin Park. They want smaller spaces for events. Then the need for better housing. Two of the top types of housing that were wanted was multi-family housing and affordable housing. Then when it comes to people visiting downtown, people wanted more events and more programming to the venues in the downtown area. And most importantly, which I was happy to see that the community really wanted, was a realistic plan, not a plan for another plan or a plan to sit on the shelves. So those are the nine themes that we've had so far. And then we have, what's next with this plan, is we have a project advisory committee meeting scheduled for the 20th. And then we have two more community-wide engagements and ongoing survey that closes on the 9th. And we also have a public engagement where we will be out in the public meeting, anyone and everyone. So if you know anyone in the neighborhoods who wants to sit down with us and talk, we are available to meet you and have the discussion. Let's go dream. Questions? Thanks Boyd. Mr. Nickel. Boyd, thank you very much. Something we've been thinking about, not formally, but informally what I'm hearing in our planning commission hearings, is that we would like to engage more with the University of Kentucky to understand their plans. And for me specifically, I want to see their campus to downtown plan. And I think that when I was looking at your slide, I saw that UK was missing from the stakeholders and maybe they weren't. But if you could, this would be a great opportunity for you on our behalf to get the information that shows the vision from the University of Kentucky, how they're going to connect campus to downtown. Because that connection will lead to increased vitality in our community. So I'm sure you've already done it, but I just want to make sure that we have got their plan incorporated and noted. And then if we can help improve their plan, or if you can help improve their plan, if they're acceptable to that, I think that that would be a great way for us to engage with UK, understand at least a little bit of their part of the plan to connect campus to downtown. Okay, so I think this will fall more on the consultant because UK will do staff on campus. So this is more with a consultant to engage. And the good news is UK has been very active in this. So they've given us access to talk to them. They gave us someone to be in the project advisory committee. So we are talking to them and we are looking at their plans. Like the latest plan they have is for the innovation district. What I was trying to say as I just leaned to Mr. Wilson and we're saying, wow, we'd like to hear about that as well. So I'm sure, I mean, we're going to continue to, we're going to find a way to engage with UK. I know there's a desire to, but this is a good opportunity for you on our behalf to outline UK's thoughts about your downtown development plan. Yes, UK, BCTC, Transy, they've been very, very active in this. And I'm actually happy at the way we are communicating and we are all in the loop on this. Great. And if there's a way that in the final document, if it involves a layout or mapping or design to include those entities prominently on whatever document is delivered, because those are major assets to our community, these wonderful universities that are downtown that do want to participate in the downtown development. No, this is actually for Director Duncan, because I understood the last time we brought this topic up, I think you indicated that there was a committee between the commission and the University of Kentucky working on this issue about what their plans are and how we might facilitate one another. Is that correct? Mr. Wilson, as I recall, I was coming in to ask Larry if he would make sure and stay for the rest of that zoning hearing and I got caught with another question. So if I didn't give the clear answer, what I should have said was similar to what Boyd said. Yes, we have members of UK on, a member of UK on the advisory committee. So we're working with them on that. We're also working with UK as they look at other developments in town. So that's a convoluted way of saying, yes, we are in an active communication with UK about what they are doing and they're thinking about for development. And we will be glad to share that with you all and include that in the master plan and include that in other reports as well. I think that's the key part is to keep up with them as well in their planning process. Two questions related to that. Do their conversations talk about housing or is that off to the side of what their plans are discussing? Since that's where we get the rub. I wouldn't call it a rub. You haven't been in my, where I've been lately. Well, I have though. I mean, from a different perspective. No, I don't know what, if they have additional plans for housing at this time. They certainly have shared with us their medical plans and some of their other academic building plans. And I suspect there'll be continued conversation about infrastructure as well. But as far as their housing, I can't give you an update on that. Okay. So my second question for Mr. Bailey is what's the, did you say the innovation district? What is that? That was mentioned to us in some of the meetings that we've been having with the University of Kentucky associated with the downtown master plan that is focused on certain areas of their campus that they're seeking to develop in the mid to near term future to kind of build upon what they've been done and that has been done off of Avenue of Champions, bolstering some of their properties that they have there and trying to play into the tech development that is coming out of the University of Kentucky. Sort of like Marks-Berry Center and those facilities? I can get back to you with some very specifics after we kind of reach out to them and we can have further discussion at that time. Okay. One other quick question, maybe just a suggestion. I know the University of Kentucky, as you've indicated, they are in conversation about a lot of things. But the question Ms. Worth asked about the housing issue, I think is the one that we should pose to them if they don't pose it to us to get their answer about what's what. Because that's where we're getting the rub. The barbershop and the athletic center and lots of other places around town. All righty. Do we have any other questions for Boyd on the downtown master plan? Tracy, you don't know what we're talking about? Whenever I have an issue with the planning commission, I always go to my barbershop and usually there's about 10 to 15 people there that are more than happy to give me all their expressions that they have about anything, especially if it pertains to their particular community. This was particularly true of Prawl Town, St. Martin's Village, Oakwood, and anything going on on the north side of town. So, those are the constituents that I represent. All righty. Thank you, Boyd. Thank you. All right. Our next item on the agenda today, Neighborhood Voices with Quinn Mulholland. Good afternoon, members of the planning commission. Okay, got this set up. Oh boy. All right. Hopefully that works. My name is Quinn Mulholland. I'm a senior planner with the outreach and strategic planning section. I've been on staff with the division of planning for almost a year and a half now. So, you all have probably seen me around, but this is my first presentation to the planning commission. So, please go easy on me. Okay. So, I'm going to be talking a little bit about a new project that we've been working on called Neighborhood Voices. So, to give you some background, Neighborhood Voices, the initiative, was really born out of a need that we identified to build trust, specifically, in our community. to build trust, specifically, in neighborhoods that have felt left out of the planning process. So, we've heard, loud and clear, in recent years, a sentiment expressed of changes happening in folks' neighborhoods and residents in these neighborhoods feeling like they didn't have a voice in those changes. And so, we really, and specifically, I think, the new outreach and strategic planning section really wants to be out and about in communities. And I think this is a really great opportunity for us to do the type of thing that really, I think, we were established to do, which is meeting people where they're at in the community, outside of the context of a potentially contentious development plan review process, and really just talk to folks about what makes their community special, what they'd like to see, sort of hopes, fears, dreams for the future. And then also, just to say, this project emerged out of conversations that we had with the offices of council members Tyler Morton and James Brown. So, I wanted to give a shout out to their offices. They've been extremely helpful in this. So, also, so in addition to the reasons that I've already stated, I think we also see a really clear mandate in a couple of the recommendations that have come out of recent studies and reports. Obviously, I don't need to tell you all about the comprehensive plan, but there is a real focus on equity in the most recent comprehensive plan, including a real focus on equity-based plan, including a real focus on public education and community engagement as it pertains to equitable development. In addition, I wanted to highlight the report that was completed by the Task Force on Neighborhoods in Transition in 2021, which I know at least one of you served on, which made a couple of recommendations that pertain to planning and specifically pertaining to sort of uplifting the history, character, and urban fabric of neighborhoods that might be at risk of displacement or gentrification. And then finally, in the public engagement toolkit that planning staff put together back in 2020, there was a recommendation that was sort of similarly geared around doing really like proactive outreach and sort of highlighting neighborhood history, character, culture. So, this is really rooted in these recommendations from these reports. So, yeah, what will it look like? I really want to emphasize that we anticipate this is going to be sort of an iterative process. This is the first time we're doing something like this. So, we want to kind of use it as an opportunity to try out different engagement tactics, see what works, what doesn't. Some of the strategies that we'll be using include listening sessions, one-on-one interviews, door-to-door canvassing, community events, both attending events that community organizations are putting on and also potentially putting on our own event to gather input. The deliverables from this project will include a report where we will compile the community input that we gather as well as some additional background research about the neighborhood and present that to you all as well as developers and community members. We're also open to supporting a community-led initiative. You know, depending on what we hear from the community, we really want this to be led and driven by what we're hearing in these communities. But if folks express interest in some sort of, you know, art project, mapping project, oral history project, historical commemoration, we certainly would be open to supporting those efforts. And then just in terms of the scope, at least our initial focus will really be on neighborhoods experiencing development pressure and neighborhoods that were identified as vulnerable in that Neighborhoods in Transition Task Force report. And we are going to start off our sort of pilot Neighborhood Voices project will be in Smithtown, the Smithtown neighborhood. So I'll get to that in a second. Some of the intended outcomes from the project. I know this is a lot, but really I think the first three all have to do with just hearing from residents, opening up lines of communication between the Division of Planning and residents in these communities, building trust, you know, sort of putting names to faces, and really hearing about what folks, you know, really think is special about their neighborhood, hearing about the history of these neighborhoods, passing the mic to residents of neighborhoods so that they can tell their own story. We also hope that this can be a resource for developers and can inform future development applicants. Like I said, we'll be providing the report that we compile to developers. We also really hope that this can be an educational opportunity. I think oftentimes the planning process can be sort of opaque to residents of the community from the outside. And so we want to sort of demystify that process and try to do some education about how the development plan review process works and how neighbors can be more, you know, involved in that process. And really, I think another goal of this is to engage a broader slice of these neighborhoods, not just, you know, folks who show up to Planning Commission meetings, but really, like, I think we hope that meeting people where they are will be able to engage a broader and more representative slice of the community and really bring more people into the planning process. And then, like I said, we, this is an iterative process, and we hope that the input that we gather will be able to actually inform future engagement efforts that we do in the future. We want to receive feedback about how people would like to be engaged in the future. Okay, so the Neighborhood Voices project, like I said, it's really about building trust. And so because of that, we want to be very clear at the outset about some limitations of the project. So firstly, we, like I said, we hope that the input that we gather can be and will be used by developers to inform proposals in these neighborhoods. That being said, there is no legal obligation on the developers to do so, because this is not a policy or regulatory change. But certainly, I think it behooves developers to take into account community input. And then the second caveat that I want to make at the outset is that we certainly take the issues of gentrification and displacement seriously. And we are very serious about addressing those issues. But we just want to be clear that this project single-handedly is not going to prevent displacement from happening. And really, we see this as more of a way to engage, excuse me, engage communities, build relationships, build trust. And that is sort of our primary goal with this. Yeah. So a little bit about the pilot project in Smithtown. Like I said, we're piloting Neighborhood Voices in Smithtown. So myself and my co-workers have been spending the past few months doing some engagement in the Smithtown neighborhood, which, if you don't know, it's bounded by 4th Street to the south, Jefferson Street to the west, 6th Street to the north, and Broadway to the east. So this picture is some of my co-workers tabling at Smithtown Day back in August. We have been meeting with key neighborhood leaders and conducting background research about the neighborhood that will inform future engagement efforts, as well as the report that we'll be coming up with. And a couple of reasons that we chose Smithtown for the pilot project. Smithtown is one of the neighborhoods that was identified in the Neighborhoods in Transition Task Force report as at risk of displacement. It was also a neighborhood where there haven't, at least, you know, recently been any sort of high-profile controversial development proposals. So we were hoping that this would be an opportunity to really do some good engagement. And it's also, it's relatively small. So we wanted to start off with a relatively smaller neighborhood. And yeah, in terms of next steps for the project, like I said, we spent the past couple of months doing some sort of small-scale community input gathering. We are going to spend November and into December doing some larger-scale community input gathering, and that'll include potentially some sort of event where we'll ask, you know, invite people to come provide input. And then later on in December into January, we will be compiling and summarizing the input that we've gathered into a report that we will then finalize and present to you all sometime in January or February. So yes, and let's see, just checking my notes. Yeah, oh, and then the, like I mentioned, there is certainly a possibility of supporting some sort of community-led initiative. But again, that will be based on what we hear from residents in Smithtown. And in general, we want to keep the timeline relatively concise so that this is something that we're able to replicate in other neighborhoods. So with that, I will open it up for questions. Mr. Wilson? Well, first of all, let me say that I applaud the actions that you're taking here. I think this process has been needed, and I think it will be productive. And in fact, I think that this will help us rather than waiting for issues to come, we can meet them head-on. So I applaud your work on that, and that's really good. A couple of things related to it, and I think it's important that you pointed out there's no legal ramifications to the developers. They can do that. But I think it's incumbent upon all of us, every time I look at these development reports that come in from the staff, I always look under that specific engagement, community engagement, no matter where it is. And I know there's no requirement on the developer to deal with that, but I think it's incumbent upon us to keep asking the question, just to let them know that we're sincere about public engagement, irrespective. The other thing is, too, we have over 26 hamlets around this community. And I got out one Sunday, and with some friends, and we got a van together, and we rode around each and every one of them, and they do have a distinct history for each of those. But the question I had is, and I hope that might come out of all this, is some legal protection for these hamlets. Mr. Wilson, let me address that. You may recall that it's been about 20 years now that we did, in partnership with UK, a formal study of the rural settlements. Got that completed, and that's been incorporated in the comprehensive plan ever since. Councilmember Lynch has expressed a strong desire to revisit that and see if they need to be refreshed, what implementation tasks there could come out of that, and that kind of thing. And Boyd will be working with Councilmember Lynch, probably starting in this winter, to revisit that. So, yes, that is an active project and planning, and the council will be involved in bringing that to the fore. Great. And will this also include other communities? For example, the hamlets where it's been identified, I think that's perfect. But places like Prawl Town, which is classified as a hamlet, but it is a historic district. And then the others, Jonestown, some of the other areas are not. I hope they are included as a part of that. I think, as Quinn said, that we're looking first at the neighborhoods in transition as a guide for where we need to start first. And certainly, we'll hear from councilmembers what they think are the areas in there. But we do have the neighborhoods in transition as our starting point. Great. And one final point. I noted that you had it in there about the gentrification and displacement. One of the key issues that we centered on was involuntary displacement, because displacement, quite frankly, is natural. And so is gentrification. There are certain areas in this community that have gone from black to white to black. You know, it's all over the place. We can't control a lot of that, legally or any other way, but we can identify it. And one of the things that came out of that report is the University of Kentucky had done some interesting studies about what communities would potentially be gentrified next. And I think that would be a good report to pull back to the table as a part of the general discussion. I could go on, but I'll stop there, because I've got another 45 minutes. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. Thank you. Mr. Davis. Thank you. So, Quinn, this is so interesting. I'm sure it's not the only thing you have going on on your plate, though. And you mentioned that you had a number of colleagues who are helping you. And this may be kind of an awkward question, but I imagine you will be going into places where there are people who speak Spanish, people who are black, people who are white. Is your team made up of a wide and diverse group of people so that you can build trust with the people you're going to be interviewing? That's a great question. So, in terms of when I've been referring to my team, that's just referring to the outreach and strategic planning team. And so, the four of us are all white. And I think we're wanting to really be reticent of that and know that when we're going into these communities, we are outsiders, and so approaching it with humility. I will also say that we have had a great working relationship with the offices of Council Members Tyler Morton and James Brown. Sarah Brown, one of Council Member Morton's aides is here. She's been a huge help for us. So, there has been, in terms of the broader team, Council Member Morton lives in the First District and has been helpful in helping us identify neighborhoods and leaders in these neighborhoods to approach. But yes, I think that is something that we are certainly bearing in mind and wanting to really approach this respectfully and with intention. And Spanish speakers amongst the group? We don't have any Spanish speakers on our outreach and strategic planning team. Thank you. Just curious. Thank you. Well, I would just add if we went into a primarily Spanish speaking area or just an area that we're known to have a decent amount of Spanish speakers, I think we could have either people within government that we know who provide those services or even somebody that we could contract with if translation was an issue. Oh, one other quick thing, if I could, if you had one of these sessions at the library on Vassell's Road, the new library there, that is primarily utilized by Hispanics and they have quite a few people there in the library that speak Spanish. So, there's a resource sitting there in the community. All righty. Mr. Mickler, could you go back to your outcome slide? Yes. Okay. So, I guess my question has to do with the goal of building trust as you sort of described it. And I'm looking at this and I guess I'm wondering what your all's thoughts are because looking at this, it feels like I'm not seeing very tangible outcome goals. And in particular, I mean, the only tangible thing this is producing is a report that I guess will get presented to us. And I, you know, if on the first side of your outcomes, you're successful in sort of building these dialogues that you're looking for, the, I mean, I know if I'm thinking in, you know, from my own perspective, I don't know that it would be very trust building with myself if there were then no tangible sort of outcomes from those conversations. So, I don't know that that would be a great way to build trust with me if you just came and got my opinions and then nothing came of it. I don't know what that would do to build trust. Yeah, I think that's a good point and I totally hear that. I think that something that we're thinking about is, you know, obviously in the scope of this project, because we do hope to replicate it in other neighborhoods, it will be a relatively, you know, short time frame. But that being said, I think we really hope that actually like through the process of having these conversations and, you know, getting input from residents that we are then able to build relationships with neighborhood leaders, residents that then, you know, continue to develop even beyond after the process of, you know, compiling that input into a report and presenting it is over. I think really for me, I see a key outcome of this is just like me going out into these communities, introducing myself to people, giving my contact information so that they know who I am, they know that I'm with planning, they know that they can reach out to me if they have questions about things that are happening that are related to planning. But I hear you that like we that's what we don't want this to be is just sort of a one-off, you know, drop in, make a quick report, add it to the shelf to gather dust. We really want this to be about building relationships. And so, yes, we hope that like with this new outreach and strategic planning section, that this is the type of engagement that we're able to do on an ongoing basis moving forward. I don't know if that answers your question. Would it be okay if I? Oh, yes, please. I'm working with Quinn. I agree and we've talked through that in many different ways and we shared the same concern with the council members that we've been working on with this. And I think where we landed with it is something is certainly better than nothing. We need to be building relationships, we need to hear from people, and we have to be very careful to say this is not a small area of plan. This is not like an infrastructure plan. We're not going to identify all the things that your neighborhood needs and then the city is going to come and improve that park or whatnot. This is about trying to hear from a broad range of people in the neighborhood. Oftentimes, when we have the zone changes, the answer is no, we don't want this. And we may not hear from everybody in the neighborhood. We may just hear from some. And what we're trying to get a sense of is what is broadly the interest and the desires of the neighborhood in terms of what they hope to preserve and how development might actually contribute in a positive way to their neighborhood. And we want to have those conversations with a broader group while we don't have something contagious happening. And we hope, to Mr. Wilson's point, that if and when a development does come to the area, that we have done some of that community input sort of on behalf of planning and the developers to say this is what we have heard, and we hope that you will take that into very serious consideration. Because once we're at a zone change level, emotions are very high. And sometimes it's difficult to have those conversations, those really sort of meaningful conversations about what we want to preserve versus what we want to be moving forward. One other suggestion, too, when you go to the communities, there should be some people identified as people who can take and introduce you to the community. Because even me, because I live on the other side of town, I'm not. But my barber, the reason why I get all these comments is every time I walk in, he always introduces me as being on the planning committee. And I'm saying, I can't do everything. I have to try to explain to people what's reasonable as such. One of the things that came out of my discussions with them is not so much that we say yes or no, it's why we say no is important to them and why we say yes. Primarily, if you say, we reject your perspective here, it's not just a simple no, but it is a no because of this and laying out those reasons as rationally as we can. But anytime I can help, I will volunteer my time as well as whatever. In fact, if you'd like to get a haircut, I'd be happy. And I guarantee that you will listen because you have no choice. If somebody's sitting there with a razor to your neck, you will listen. So, Mr. Wilson, that brings up a point that I was thinking about is, is there a conversation of you, the commission might make a decision that you find disappointing. It's not that they don't believe you or they don't think your perspective is correct, but legally or whatever the case may be, like Mr. Wilson said, we have to either say yes or no. It has that come up in conversation of just if the commission does not vote the way you feel they should, it's not because of this or that, but rather because it took me a long time to really learn that even after I was put on the commission. Absolutely. And yes, I think that's really when we talk about the public education piece, that's really one of the outcomes that we hope to achieve is, you know, giving people a sense for how the planning process works, the role of the planning commission and the constraints that you all have and sort of the limitations of the process. Because I think, right, totally, it can be very alienating to come out to a hearing, give your public comment, and then the decision goes the other way. So, really doing education about the entirety of the process and also like how residents can best engage in that process, because it can be very dispiriting to engage in a process where you think that your input doesn't matter. Mr. Chair, let me build on that also. And to address Mr. Mickler as well, what Quinn has said is absolutely what we're trying to get out of this. And in many respects, this is also building community input for the major plans, where then, Robin, you will see action come out of. So, if we introduce Smithtown and other places to the comprehensive planning process, and in turn get their input when that plan comes around in a year and a half or so, then we've made a major stride. We're not just getting the usual people coming to speak. And their voices are going to have an impact then on the outcome of the plan and then subsequently how the planning commission makes decisions about development. So, while this is certainly something that we want to learn more about the individual neighborhoods and areas, we also see it as a way to get them involved in the bigger picture, where then there can be tangible outcomes as a result. This all makes sense to me. And I mean, the communication and the dialogue, I do think can be a positive thing. I also suspect that when you go into a neighborhood and you get all this impact and you create that dialogue, when a development does come around that they're not in favor of, and you do have a staff report that recommends approval, you're not necessarily creating a – it's pretty easy to erase anything that you've worked to gain unless you define really clearly what the outcome of their comments are, I guess. And it seems like when I'm looking at this list, and I'm not sure how to create it, but it seems like some loop back to the neighborhood with sort of a timeline and like to make sure that continued conversation happens that you're talking about is built into the process with a mechanism for tracking it, I guess. Absolutely, yes. I think we'll definitely take that into consideration. Thank you. Both what Mr. Duncan said about this engaging people now, but hopefully for the next big effort, couldn't be more important because how often in planning processes does it seem like you only hear from the same people and you don't hear from the people who you also want to hear from? And plus what Kenzie said – sorry, Ms. Gleason – what you said really struck me, which is since the planning commission has less of a role now, now that it was House Bill 443 and now it's something else, knowing what the community or that neighborhood thinks so that when the technical review committee meets with the developer, they will have better information, which will better inform all the decisions. So I think it has a lot of potential. I think it's wonderful that you're doing this. Sort of building along those lines, what I hear maybe coming out of this is either establishing or strengthening communication networks within particular areas. I'm thinking, you know, I'm sure Council Member Morton, that he has a link out. I know what my council member does, but it's once a month. It's a newsletter. In certain neighborhoods, many people don't get those newsletters. They don't read them. A lot of people don't use the internet very much. And I think what – and specific things can happen, like with what you voiced in terms of development plans. You know, Council said, if you're going to do development, we're now going to post a sign and we're going to send out information. So that creates an opportunity for information going out to the community in time that they are aware of it. And I see that as one little tangible example of something that maybe can create opportunities for information to flow better back and forth, both directions, not just one. I can just add, I agree to that and I agree with the comments that Robin has made and Molly as well. The thing that I'm always trying to be cautious about as I talk to people, when they come down here, they're not interested in five-year plans. Comprehensive plans mean absolutely nothing to people who are in pain for the moment. So, whereas I think it's good to try to get people involved in the long-term process, they're not going to do that until they have been demonstrated that the short-term process works. It's like a person in the middle of the desert. You can't talk about building a pipeline when they're dying of thirst. You've got to get a canteen out there. Then you can talk about the pipeline. Some of the people look at this as just bureaucratic red tape and they don't quite understand the importance of this particular process as it relates to their momentary pain. This is where trust really comes in because the people in the community say, you have to be cool. They are working. That's better than coming from us saying you need to be cool and what have you. That does not just fit to the humanity issue here. So, we've got to balance that off because I don't think that's going to always hit off people coming in and expressing their pain and passion to us, but we have to be patient as it relates to that. I mean, we knew the bed was burning when we got in it. So, we should expect that pain and passion, but I think this is a really good first step and I think the key thing now is the follow-through. I think that's a great statement and I concur 100%, but one thing that may be helpful is when you do engage with different communities to take with you the comprehensive plan and help the neighborhood understand by right the zoning that exists in their community, what can be done by right from the private property owner, and then what the comprehensive plan is encouraging for future development because it's important for everyone to understand that when change comes to the community, if it's done without a zone change, it is a private citizen developing in accordance with our zoning laws by right. So, I think it's important for neighbors to understand your community is this. It's a combination of these zonings. We anticipate it true in the long term looking like this. So, these are some things you may be aware of. Okay. We are grateful, Quinn. We are grateful to council members Morton and James Brown, and we appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you very much. No problem. All righty. Our next item is Imagine Lexington Analytic Research Center. Mr. Bailey. Thank you very much. I will go relatively quickly, but I will highlight a few things that were described today, both with the Blue Sky Small Area Plan and the Downtown Master Plan. What you're seeing is extensive community outreach that is being largely driven by the project managers that are working on those two projects. So, Boyd Saway and Eve Miller are really pushing our consultants to do more, go above and beyond, and try to reach people where they are at and try to do more. I think the project that Quinn just described, the Neighborhood Voices that is working through OSP, is a clear indication that both long-range planning services, OSP, the MPO, are all picking up on the sentiments that have been brought up in the past several comprehensive plans that the Planning Commission has pushed for greater amounts of community engagement, community education, and trying to get the best possible plans that we can get. And I think this will all lead to a really wonderful comprehensive plan, hopefully, in 2028 and when we're leading up to that during the outreach. Part of that is trying to make sure that people are able to see the data, the information that is out there. I did want to highlight our Imagine Lexington website has changed a little bit. We are now on the government's website, so it will take you into our URL. It's still there, imaginelexington.com, but it just looks a little bit different. One of the things we are really trying to hit upon as we lead up to the next comprehensive plan is getting as much data and information available to the public. This will help you all make decisions as you go along. It will also feed into some of the other decision-makers' processes as we move forward. So, under Imagine Lexington Analytic Research Center, that may or may not pop up. Hopefully, it's still working. If you want to visit this online, it's imaginelexington.com backslash ARC. And we're hoping that it still is working. We have been adding a lot of information to this recently, so we're working with the Division of GIS to try to get these things uploaded. But one of the things that I wanted to highlight was some of the upcoming data that's going to be added onto the website. Imagine on this white screen that you would see several new data points that are being pulled from the Sustainable Growth Report that was created by the Sustainable Growth Task Force. We are updating that information. We are making it, hopefully, available on an active website that would pull up the different charts that were laid out in that, and we're continually adding to that information, making sure that it is a component of what we're looking at for any type of growth metrics or getting into our comprehensive plan. One of the things that has been highlighted throughout our review of the data is that we only look at it every five years. One of the major components of the ARC, when it is working, is that we are trying to make sure that people are getting month-by-month updates, if not annual updates. This will get into trends like housing development within our community permitting, different aspects like the affordability of housing. All of this is then going to play into what we are calling our lab reports area. Iris Dooling, right back here, give us a wave, Senior Planner with Long-Range Planning, is currently working to move along our projects, and the website is working. So, if you go into the lab, you will see that we currently have two new lab posts. These are reports that essentially are going to be breaking down either information off of things that the Division of Planning and the Planning Commission have worked together on, like accessory dwelling units. This will be a review of the past work, what is ongoing, and then what is the future kind of things that we're looking at. What are we trying to develop as we are trying to implement the zoning ordinance text amendments that have been adopted. What you're not seeing here is what Iris is working with the vast majority of our staff right now to do, which is create two other types of reports. One that would get into a more narrative explanation of elements of the Comprehensive Plan, pulling out action items that are described within the Comprehensive Plan, building upon it, and giving the public greater resource or data to support why those were in there, why those policies and action items are so important. The third type of report that we're looking at for this website would be a comparative analysis. When we're getting into the data that we're uploading online, what does it mean when housing prices are going up and the actual income is staying at a much more level basis? What does that mean for people to obtain housing within our community? What does it mean for shifting types of housing production within our community? These are all things that we'll be calling out in some of these lab reports as they go along. We see this as being incredibly important, not only as we lead up to our Comprehensive Plan, but also to keep the public updated on the different things we're doing. So, if our outreach and strategic planning is going out and teaching people about the planning process, getting into trying to find out what people love about their neighborhoods, this is the other part of this, to show people what is going on in the community, maybe outside of their neighborhood. What are the effects that would be impacting issues of involuntary displacement within our community? What are the things that could then lead to perspective changes, policy changes, or regulatory changes that we might want to call out in a small area plan, a master plan, or in a Comprehensive Plan? So, all of these efforts are really working in tandem to create a very robust public information gathering and reporting process so that we can make the best decisions possible and have the most educated public possible. That is a quick run-through. If you have any questions, I'm happy you got to look at the website. Great. Thank you, Hal. Do we have any questions for Hal on this particular agenda item? Thank you very much. Thanks, Hal. All right. The last item on our agenda today is legal reminders from a counselor. Yeah, I'd love to come up here and tell you all about this at the end of the day when you've been here for however long, but this will be quick. I'm going to just go through a couple of things with you guys. We thought this might be important just because we have, you know, some new members on the Commission. I don't have a report for you because I want it to be more just hitting some points with you and then if we need to have a discussion more than anything else. So, you know, we have a few new members on here. We also have had some significant changes with the update to the Comprehensive Plan, which is quite a bit different with an expansion with House Bill 443 that's now KRS 100-275. So, we just thought maybe going back and hitting some things with you all and specifically things that relate to how you're all's role is interacting with the community both, you know, as you as an individual but also you as a Commission member and you acting in your role as the Commission member as it pertains to different things that y'all have to deal with and handle. So, I'll go through what I wanted to say pretty quickly and then if y'all have questions, I'll be happy to try to answer those and we'll just go from there and hopefully it won't take too long. So, the first thing I wanted to just remind you is that, you know, with the change of House Bill 443, you all are not seeing all of the development plans anymore. You're not seeing all of those things that you used to look at and talk about, you know, if they meet all the criteria that were in the ordinance, they're moving on. But you are seeing some of them. They're coming to you if they have waivers. They're coming to you, you know, if there's certain concerns that are raised about them and the staff is trying as best we can to direct you when you get those. But, you know, sometimes that produces people talking with you guys or trying to ask you guys things about those more generally because they're not hearing from you all in a Commission meeting about them. If that happens, you just need to remember that if they're meeting the criteria that you all put forward to the Council and that the Council adopted for that and they're approved, they're moving forward. They're moving through the process. They're just not necessarily coming to you all. So, while you may be free to answer questions about that or to talk about that, you can't really change that result by talking to anybody. So, and we'll talk about this a little bit more related to zone changes, it might be best if you don't express a contrary opinion to what's been approved and is moving forward. And I say that for two reasons. One, because it has moved through the process. And if it's been approved, it's going through the process that we dictated by ordinance and it's doing what it's supposed to do. Secondly, and we'll talk about this more specifically in a minute, it's also to protect you guys just because, you know, everybody's not going to agree with everything this Commission does, whether you're on it or not all the time. I'm sure you all know that. But it just helps you if something's moving through an approved process, it helps you to maybe not get put in an uncomfortable situation unknowingly. And I'll get into that a little bit more in a minute. As to zone changes, those are not different. You're still seeing those exactly the same as you saw them before. They're coming through committees and at your zoning hearings at the end of the month. You all still see all of that. You still have the opportunity to voice your opinions, to ask questions, to deliberate, and to make decisions. But what I do need to tell you about that is you all are an 11-member body. So six of you guys are there at a minimum, or you can't have a meeting because that's your quorum. Your vote, whatever number's there if you have a quorum, is your all's decision. So whether you approve a plan, you disapprove a plan, you postpone a plan, which we can only do under certain circumstances if there's time allowable, that's the decision that you all as a Commission have made. From our perspective and the staff's perspective, what we're trying to do in the course of that, and particularly my role, which is why I try not to talk very often, which is also a good thing for you guys because if I don't talk very often, that's good. That means we're doing our job, is that we want you all to make sure you follow the statutory process, you follow our zoning ordinances in our process, and that you reach your conclusions in a way that if they're challenged, we can defend them. That's our first priority. And so in a zone change, you're making your decision based on the application that's filed, all of that information is in front of you, you're making your decision based on what the staff tells you, what the applicant tells you, and what anybody from the public tells you at that zone change. But your decision is made based on what's in that hearing at that time. So if you all make your decision based on that, that's why we have findings and everything else, then we feel like that's a pretty defensible decision, if it gets challenged, whatever the outcome is. The other part of that, that we're trying to look out for you all with is, we want to make sure that you all engage in that process at that hearing without being questioned as to how you're making your decision. And so this goes into another part of something that we're seeing that we didn't use to really provide you all an orientation, we didn't use to talk about that much, but there are so many avenues for communication now. You know, there's email, there's all the social media platforms, there's texting, there's all kinds of things that can happen. And I'm sure you all have experienced that in some context about some particular zone change or matter that's coming before you guys. What I would want to tell you is, I would caution you about responding to those things, or on your own, you know, maybe putting something out there, because if you do that, and it's not in the course of the hearing, I don't know why people call me when I'm in a meeting, but anyway, so you're potentially putting out there that you've already heard information about that, you've heard information from outside the hearing, you've heard it maybe from one particular side or the other. And that, I'm not saying that it's true, but I'm saying that can account for the fact that someone thinks that you've already formed your opinion, or that you have some kind of bias, or that you have pre-decided not based on the hearing. And that can cause a challenge as well. And it's problematic for two reasons. One, because it can, not normally, but it can cause us a little more problem in defending whatever the action is, because we have to then also fight back on, no, it wasn't bias. No, they followed the policy, you know, those kinds of things. But it also can cause you all some concern, because if somebody's going to challenge a decision, I mean, let's be honest, it happens. They don't like it. They have a right to appeal it. And particularly if they have counsel, they're going to throw everything in that appeal that they possibly can. So if they can pull something out of social media, or off your email, or some response you made, or a text message and say, look, they already decided their vote wasn't appropriate, they were biased, that, you know, impacted the whole process, blah, blah, blah. Then we have to defend that as well. I will tell you, and I mean, this, ironically, this is not a horror story, even though Halloween is tomorrow. But this has happened in the past, and I've had to deal with it. You may have heard this story before if you've been oriented more than once. But, you know, we've had cases where people have raised specifically claims about members of the council, or members of the planning commission, engaging in conversations, voicing their opinions, putting stuff out there before a hearing, after a hearing that compromised maybe that. And then as the case has progressed, what has happened is that other attorney has said to us, well, you know, I think that's a big problem. I think I want to explore that some more. I want to depose those people. And I want you to give me all their emails. Well, nobody wants that. If we're in a lawsuit, we may or may not be able to fend that off. In the particular case I'm thinking of that we had to handle, we couldn't fend it off. They deposed five council members. Every single one of them was mad. And the first call I got from every single one of them was, you're going to have to get me out of this. And my answer was, I can't. So I'm saying that to you all, both to protect the process, and both to protect you guys, because you all have a hard job. And people want to come to you, and they want to talk to you, and they want to ask you about stuff. My caution is, just don't talk to them about specific projects, zone changes, and things that are coming before you. You know, to this discussion we had earlier about the neighborhoods. You know, if you want to inform people, or people that you know about the process, how it works, what avenues are available to them, what information sources they have, those kinds of things, I don't have a problem with that all day long. If we're having a discussion about a text amendment, which is community-wide, is generally more of an open process, I don't, that's great. But when you get on a specific project that we've either decided on, or in the process of deciding on, we need to keep that process as clean as we can. And we need to keep it both for your all's, you know, well-being and concern of doing your job, and for the process itself. We, you know, we don't get a ton of appeals, but we do, we have seen a little uptick lately. And on a couple of them, most of them, we're successful in defending them, but on a couple of them, we're waiting on some decisions to see how they're going to go. So I just want, we just wanted to kind of remind you guys of where you are on that kind of stuff, and what, where you should and shouldn't venture. It's not a, it's not a line in the sand, you know, kind of thing. So I will also say this, you know, it's, it's also not the question of you all are subject to the Ethics Act, which is primarily about, you know, you're making decisions or doing things that would benefit you financially, personally, or your family, or, you know, it's not really about that. That, we don't have a problem with that. That is not what usually happens. It's more about these more other types of things that are more hard to pin down, like bias, or predisposition, or, you know, making a decision that's not based on the record that's in front of you. And that, that's just what we want to caution you about. I will also tell you that if you have questions, and some of you have done this, and I would encourage you to do it in the past, I don't have all the answers, but I'll try to give you the best one I can. If you call me, and I have some cards, if you want them to have my number on them, or you can email me, and I'll try to get back to you, and say, hey, I have this situation coming up, or I have somebody's, you know, that's inquired with me about this, or somebody that's asked me to do this. Do you think that would be okay? And, and for those of you who've done that, you know, I'm going to be pretty straightforward with you. I'm going to tell you, I don't know if I would do that, or maybe that's not the best idea, or that should be fine. You know, and that protects both you and our process, but feel free to do that if, if you need to do that. And, and thinking through those kinds of things, I will tell you all, you know, I was the first class, this may date me to some degree, but I was the first class at the University of Kentucky Law School that we had to take the professional responsibility exam before we could take the bar exam. They implemented it at the end of our second year, so we had one year to do it before we could take the bar exam, but we, so we all had to then take a class so we could take the test. And the teacher that taught that class, because it was all about kind of ethics and conflicts and those kind of situations, he said, you know, ultimately, if, if your gut's saying, I don't know about this, this might be a problem, he was always told us, at a minimum, you should inquire, and at a maximum, maybe you shouldn't do it. So I just put that out there to you, you know, if you, if something's feeling odd to you, or strange, or you're not sure, you can inquire, at a minimum, and we can try to hash it out and see where we are. But that's really, I think, Jim, everything you wanted me to cover. But you know, and if you have any questions, other than you just want to get out of here, you know, let me know. But we just kind of wanted to touch base back with you, because a lot of things have changed, and you all are seeing a lot of things, and we feel like you're probably getting a lot of inquiries to you about the process and how we do things. Thank you, Mrs. Jones, I appreciate that. And I appreciate you and everyone in legal during our hearings, which sometimes it's just human nature, we can get off course just a little bit for bringing us back to what does the discretion that is for items truly under the purview of the Planning Commission, and making sure that we stay in in whatever lane we need to be on that particular discussion. Yes, sir, Mr. Wilson. For the people who are not here, some of our council members are not here, is this being taped in such a way that they can... It should be. Yes, this will be archived so other members can watch it, yes. Okay, well, what I'm suggesting is, is that we don't just simply say it's in the archives, you must look at this before you come back to the next Planning Commission meeting. I know you can't, that's another legal thing, but I'm trying to make sure that we're all informed equally about what's going on. Okay, and Tracy's been kind enough to answer questions for me personally, in this capacity, and she's never billed me for it. Well, Mr. Davis, I can't bill you for it, but I don't mind truthfully, and I'm looking at two of the name tags that are not here, and they've both contacted me directly and asked me questions before as well. So, you know, again, I will try to give you the best advice I can and help, you know, guide through the process. And I will say, you know, sometimes there's questions that come up that, you know, you might hear me say, hmm, I've never had that posed before. So, but we'll think through and figure it out. Thank you, Tracy. Any final questions before we go to Mr. Duncan? Okay, thank you very much. Mr. Chair, thank you, and thank you all for being here today. A lot of information to cover, and I really appreciate and respect the questions that you all ask. And as Tracy said, and everyone said, please feel free. We are a resource. Call on me, call on our team. We'll be happy to help in any way we can. The next time the Planning Commission gets together is next Thursday for your committees. And just to let you all know, since we, I won't see you, the Monday or Tuesday, the 11th, Veterans Day is a holiday for the government, so we'll be back on schedule on November 13th as well. And then one final thing. We've been having a bake sale upstairs to raise money for the United Way, and I heard from Rachel that everything has been marked half off. So, if you all need, want to pick up a treat on your way home, 7th floor conference room, we do have some cookies and things up there. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Duncan, and thank you to all the staff and everyone who presented today. We covered a lot of information, and the Planning Commission is very grateful for your expertise. I'm sorry. I believe we're open on Election Day. The city is. Is that correct? I'm sorry. Is the city open on Election Day next week? Yes, yes. Our next holiday is November 11th, so we're open next week, yes. All right. Thank you very much. If nobody has anything else, we are adjourned. Thank you.