# Technical Review Committee - November 26, 2025 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Committee · November 26, 2025 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6633 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6633?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2025-11-26 - **Body**: Committee - **Last revised**: February 15, 2026 - **Length**: 22,974 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 Technical Committee convened on November 26, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. in the Phoenix Building, 3rd Floor Conference Room. The meeting's presiding officer is not recorded in the available materials. The committee worked through a full agenda of 10 items, spanning final subdivision plans, development plans, zoning development plans, reapprovals, and previously postponed items. Of the 10 agenda items considered, 8 were approved and 2 were postponed — specifically the Development Plans for Wolf Run Industrial Park, Lot 1, and the Zoning Development Plans for Lexmark International Corporation, Lot 1. A total of 10 motions and votes were taken during the meeting. No public comments were heard. ## Attendance The following members were present at the Committee meeting on 2025-11-26: - Tom Hatfield - Steve Garland - Johan Graham - Brad Boaz - Stephanie Blaine - Tony Barrett - John Hill No members were recorded as absent or late. All seven members were in attendance for the meeting. ## Votes and Decisions The Committee took action on ten items at the November 26, 2025 meeting, with eight approvals and two postponements, all decided unanimously. - **PLN FRP 2532 – Quintana Estates** was approved unanimously with conditions: the addition of note number 8 to add access easements to lots 2 and 38, removal of note number 4 under plans, questions, or concerns, and removal of note number 6 regarding Department of Environmental Quality approval of environmentally sensitive areas. [timestamp: 0:17:57] - **PLN-MJDP-25-64 – Wolf Run Industrial Park** was unanimously postponed. [timestamp: 0:30:16] - **PL&MJDP-25-67 – Margaret C. Kamick Property** was approved unanimously without conditions. [timestamp: 1:01:31] - **PL&MJDP-25-70 – Park Hills Shopping Center, Lot 3** was approved unanimously with conditions: removal of note number 1 under plan questions and concerns, and removal of sign-offs for the addressing office and the Division of Waste Management. [timestamp: 1:15:25] - **PL&MJDP-25-59 – Lexmark International Corporation, Lot 1** was unanimously postponed. [timestamp: 1:32:51] - **PL&MJDP-25-68 – Hazen Property, Montmullin Street Subdivision** was approved unanimously with the condition that the Department of Environmental Quality's sign-off be removed. [timestamp: 1:43:42] - **PL&MJDP-25-71 – Great House Property, The Village at Great Acres, Lot 9** was approved unanimously without conditions. [timestamp: 1:52:18] - **PL&MJDP-25-44 – Interstate Park Development, Tract 1M** was approved unanimously with conditions: removal of note number 2 under plans, questions, or concerns, and removal of several sign-offs. [timestamp: 2:05:18] - **PL&MJDP-25-23 – Highmount Subdivision Unit 1, Lot 2** was approved unanimously with the condition that several sign-offs be removed. [timestamp: 2:08:42] - **PL&MJDP-25-42 – Phelps Property** was approved unanimously without conditions. [timestamp: 2:26:55] No roll call vote tallies were recorded for any item. No motions were attributed to specific members in the available data. ## Final Subdivision Plans - Quintana Estates [timestamp: 00:00] The Committee opened its meeting with a discussion of the final subdivision plans for Quintana Estates. Tom Hatfield presented the proposal, which calls for **50 buildable lots** and **8 HOA lots** within the development. The discussion covered various requirements and conditions associated with the final subdivision plans, though specific details of individual concerns or debate points were addressed as part of the review process. The item was categorized as a discussion matter, indicating the Committee examined the proposal's particulars before moving toward a decision. Following the discussion, the Committee **approved** the final subdivision plans for Quintana Estates. ## Development Plans - Wolf Run Industrial Park, Lot 1 [timestamp: 18:27] The Committee took up Agenda Item 3a, a discussion of development plans for Wolf Run Industrial Park, Lot 1. The proposal involves the construction of several buildings intended for office and storage use on the lot. Key speaker Josh Despain participated in the discussion, which covered the specifics of the development proposal as well as various requirements and conditions associated with the plans. The meeting record indicates that multiple conditions were raised and debated during the course of the discussion, though the specific details of those requirements were not further enumerated in the available materials. The item was ultimately **postponed**, meaning no final decision or approval was reached at this meeting. The matter is expected to return before the Committee at a future date. ## Development Plans - Margaret C. Kamick Property [timestamp: 1:01:31] The Committee took up Agenda Item 3b, a discussion of development plans for the Margaret C. Kamick Property. The proposal under consideration included a senior living facility alongside single-family residential lots. Key speakers on this item were **Steve Garland** and **Johan Graham**, who presented and discussed the proposal with the Committee. The discussion covered various requirements and conditions associated with the development, though the specific details of those conditions were addressed during the course of the meeting. The item was ultimately **approved** by the Committee. ## Development Plans - Park Hills Shopping Center, Lot 3 [timestamp: 1:15:25] The committee took up agenda item 3c, a discussion of development plans for Park Hills Shopping Center, Lot 3. Brad Boaz was the key speaker presenting on this item. The proposal centered on a drive-through adjacent area intended to serve as a drop-off location for the Goodwill shop at the site. The discussion covered various requirements and conditions associated with the development plans, though specific details of those conditions were not itemized in the available record. The committee ultimately approved the development plans for Park Hills Shopping Center, Lot 3. ## Zoning Development Plans - Lexmark International Corporation, Lot 1 [timestamp: 1:32:51] The Committee took up agenda item 4a, a discussion of zoning development plans for Lexmark International Corporation, Lot 1. The proposal under consideration involved the development of an automobile service station and hotel on the subject lot. Key speakers on this item included **Tom Hatfield** and **William Hodges**, who participated in the discussion surrounding the proposal's requirements and conditions. The conversation addressed various requirements and conditions associated with the development plans, though the item was brought forward as a discussion rather than a final action item. The item was ultimately **postponed**, and no final determination was reached at this meeting. ## Zoning Development Plans - Hazen Property, Montmullin Street Subdivision [timestamp: 1:43:42] The committee took up agenda item 4b, a discussion of zoning development plans for the Hazen Property, Montmullin Street Subdivision. The proposal centers on a multi-story mixed-use building for the site. Tom Hatfield was the key speaker during this item, presenting the development plans and addressing the various requirements and conditions associated with the proposal. The discussion covered the specifics of the mixed-use building concept as well as the conditions that would apply to the project moving forward. The committee ultimately **approved** the zoning development plans for the Hazen Property, Montmullin Street Subdivision. *Note: Additional detail on specific conditions, concerns raised, or the full scope of the debate is not available in the source data for this item.* ## Zoning Development Plans - Great House Property, The Village at Great Acres, Lot 9 [timestamp: 1:52:18] The committee took up agenda item 4c, a discussion of zoning development plans for Great House Property, The Village at Great Acres, Lot 9. The proposal under consideration involved the development of a bank with a drive-through on the subject lot. - **Key speaker:** Tony Barrett presented and participated in the discussion on this item. - The discussion covered various requirements and conditions associated with the proposed development plan for the lot. - The proposal specifically included a bank with a drive-through as the intended use for the property. The committee reviewed the relevant conditions tied to the development plan before moving forward. Following the discussion, the item was **approved**. ## Reapprovals/Continued Discussion - Interstate Park Development, Tract 1M [timestamp: 2:05:18] The committee took up agenda item 6a, a continued discussion regarding the Interstate Park Development, Tract 1M. Stephanie Blaine was the key speaker presenting on this item. The discussion centered on a proposal involving a hotel as well as revised lot configurations for the tract. Committee members examined various requirements and conditions associated with the development as part of this reapproval process. The item was ultimately **approved** by the committee. --- *Note: Additional detail on specific conditions, concerns raised, or debate among committee members was not available in the source materials for this agenda item.* ## Postponed Items - Highmount Subdivision Unit 1, Lot 2 [timestamp: 2:08:42] The committee took up agenda item 7b, a previously postponed matter concerning Highmount Subdivision Unit 1, Lot 2. The item involved a proposal to subdivide a lot that contains a duplex, along with discussion of the associated requirements and conditions tied to the subdivision request. John Hill was the key speaker on this item, presenting the proposal and addressing the relevant conditions that would apply to the subdivision. The discussion covered the various requirements necessary to move the item forward, which had been the subject of the prior postponement. Following the discussion, the committee approved the item. ## Postponed Items - Phelps Property [timestamp: 2:26:55] The committee took up agenda item 7c, a previously postponed item concerning the Phelps Property. The proposal under consideration included a mix of uses: a convenience store (C store), a restaurant, townhomes, and apartments. Tony Barrett was the key speaker during this portion of the meeting, leading the discussion on the item. The committee reviewed various requirements and conditions associated with the proposal as part of its deliberations on the mixed-use development. The item was ultimately **approved** by the committee. > *Note: Additional detail on specific conditions, concerns raised, or debate among committee members was not available in the source materials for this item.* --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of PLN FRP 2532, Quintana Estates - **Motion** — postponed (0-0): Postponement of PLN-MJDP-25-64 Wolf Run Industrial Park - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of PL&MJDP-25-67 Margaret C. Kamick Property - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of PL&MJDP-25-70 Park Hills Shopping Center, Lot 3 - **Motion** — postponed (0-0): Postponement of PL&MJDP-25-59 Lexmark International Corporation, Lot 1 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of PL&MJDP-25-68 Hazen Property, Montmullin Street Subdivision - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of PL&MJDP-25-71 Great House Property, The Village at Great Acres, Lot 9 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of PL&MJDP-25-44 Interstate Park Development, Tract 1M - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of PL&MJDP-25-23 Highmount Subdivision Unit 1, Lot 2 - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of PL&MJDP-25-42 Phelps Property --- ## Full transcript you Good morning, everyone. It's ready to start the meeting. We got Thanksgiving tomorrow. So wish all of you a happy Thanksgiving for tomorrow. So first plan today is going to be FRP 2532 Quintana Estates. This is located out off of Parris Pike. This is heading north, this direction north at the bottom of the page. We have a proposal for a street with circle and some connection to adjacent properties. At a later time the LFUCG owns this as a park. So we're to have a connection to a park at this point. They're proposing 50 buildable lots and eight HOA lots. Let's blow this up real quick. It gets a little closer to see all the lots and the detention areas and the HOAs. With that, the requirements not met to note the name of street labeled C. Typically we don't just have a street labeled C. I don't know if it's part of Abbott Hill Trail or not. List all private utility providers. 13, 14, 17 was in relation to a waiver. Number 18 was in relation to a trail from the preliminary subdivision plan. PLNMJSGB 24-1. Addition of purpose of the plan. Addition of street cross section at island location in front of lots 1, 2, 37, 38. It's not working. It's 1 and 2, 37, 38. It's right here at the top. There seems to be what looks like an island so we need to have a street cross section for that. There was no waiver requested. Design considerations review all the comments provided by the division of engineering. Site development shall comply with the amended of the stormwater manual. Plan questions or concerns. Explain islands in front of 1, 2, 37, 38. Why do we have that there? Discuss driveway location for lot 1. It's kind of limited to as far as the location and then it looks like you have a tree protection area here so I wanted to clarify the driveway area. Discuss the timing and construction of the trail. Discuss the need for a waiver for no public sewer system. Discuss maintenance of existing ponds. Discuss tree protection area that appears to preclude the installation of a driveway on lot 1. Staff recommendations. We have engineering traffic, landscape examiner addressing, urban forester, department of environmental quality, bike and ped, open space, addition of utilities and street light easements by the utility companies, documentation of division of water quality for capacity, U.S. Postal Service, division of parks and rec for the approval of the point for future park and then it says correct all note deficiencies listed as requirements not met. So I want to ask if anyone here has any questions or concerns or can be removed from this list of conditions. Environmental quality can be removed. Okay, thank you. Cheryl? Yes. Under plan questions or concerns when I sat down to do my comments I was thinking that the pump station was private but I have documentation from I guess when the preliminary subdivision plan went through that water quality had talked to the applicant and has plans for it to be public. Is that correct, Chris? So you can strike through the comments about privates. So condition number 4 under plan questions can be removed. Okay. Anyone else have any other comments or questions? If not, the applicant. My name is Tom Hatfield. I'm with EA Partners. We're in agreement or ready to discuss any comments that you have. The islands and the entrance is the developer making an attempt to increase the aesthetics of the entrance, come up with a plan. This is a very nice development that he's just trying to enhance the appearance and the entrance coming off of Parris Pike. I think all the other comments are pretty straightforward. The trail is under construction. The driveway access for lot 1 will be worked out either around the tree protection area or through lot 2 with some kind of an access easement. I think the maintenance of the ponds will be by the HOA. So I think all the other questions are pretty straightforward. We're willing to or in agreement with them. I'm glad to answer any questions. You mentioned that trails under construction. How are y'all addressing the crossing at that front entrance? It's a right in, right out there, isn't it? Is that correct? No, it's a full-blown. It is full access? Okay. It looked like it had a pork chop in it. Well, it's got a right out lane and then it's got an in and an out. You can make a left turn out of there. Okay. We've made improvements to Parris Pike in accordance with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. We worked with them to have an approved encroachment permit. But the Planning Commission approved a right in, right out? With the work KYTC, it became a full-blown intersection. Yeah, but you have to have both approval. Well, we're here now, I guess, to discuss it. The problem with that entrance was that you're going to have people trying to make left turns out. It didn't have a closed median. So you're going to create an issue with traffic trying to make and cut through and not follow the guidelines of a right in, right out. The pork chop... Yeah, what's the point of a pork chop then? Well, it's to protect utilities. We had all kinds of issues with utilities along Parris Pike. Every time we turned around, we had a water line or a gas line or an AT&T. There were two or three pedestals that were in that island that's in the middle. So all of these things should have been in your 50% report, design changes, so that they're conveyed to the Planning Commission prior to the point of you recording plots. Okay. We apologize for not coming back to you. I'm still trying to wrap my head around that. So if the traffic is directed to make a right because of that pork chop, but they can make a left. I mean, that doesn't look like a typical full access intersection. It looks like a right in, right out on the plan. You've got an in and out lane to the left of the island. Okay. And you've got a right turn to the right of the island. Okay. And the lanes are designed for that. And the island is hiding a telephone or wind stream pedestal. It is now, we've had to lower it down and turn it into a below grade vault. So that's what's within that island. So does the trail come in and cross further? The trail will go behind it. Okay. That's more when I was curious how you were making that crossing. If you're utilizing that pork chop as a refuge or if you're... I don't think it's not. It's just going to come straight across. Okay. It's not big enough for refuge and it doesn't come back far. It didn't look like it was, and I thought, well, we'll just ask to see what they're doing. If you've driven out there, it's cut in and the curves are not down. Okay. So that you can see where it's coming across. Okay. So is that another conflict for lot one and a drive-through or driveway? It seems like we're moving the trail back and then the tree protection area is coming from the other side. It's definitely limited, but the builders will work it out. And if we have to get an easement across lot two, we can do that as well. I think we would prefer you put an easement on lot two because there's, with the tree protection area, the trail, you're set back already with landscaping, you're eating into all that frontage of all these other conflict points. And that's fine. Can you give us an exhibit for those first four lots? Sure. And I think that will clarify it for everybody to make everybody feel more comfortable that you have a potential plan that's not locked in, but at least it's put some thought into where things will go and kind of guide the builder in that direction. And we've looked at that with the landscaping plan that the developers put together. Okay. Was there any correspondence whatsoever with David about that entrance change? We correspond with engineering. We provided them with all of our KYTC encroachment permits. And the improvements to Parris Pike have been shown on our plans, on the approved set of plans. Okay. So this is more of a question for you, Tracy. If the Planning Commission approved a write-in and write-out and it's changed, do they have to re-approve this? I don't know. I'm going to have to look into that. Okay. I would think that it could be addressed at the final record plat stage. I guess I don't want to send the message that the Planning Commission is approving plans that then can be not ignored, but significantly deviated from, especially in terms of access. It's an agreement between the Planning Commission and the state. They both have to agree. We have situations where one overrides the other, where someone says no, and then the answer is no. Right? The state can do that, but the Planning Commission can also say, on your plan, we're not approving an access at that location. And I can't, I don't recall exactly how we got to the point where we were, whether we presented the state with the write-in, write-out, and they said no, that because of the, it's already a three-way intersection with an open median. No, no, I'm talking about, are you talking about the write-in, write-out? Well, your access point has served one single-family home for decades, right, or a century. And now it's proposed for 50 single-family homes. And so some of those vehicles were not going to want to make a right turn and go down and make a U-turn in front of the country club. They'll want to make the left turn, just like they do out of a lot of write-in, write-outs around town. And because you've got an open median right there, it invites them to do that. If it was a closed median, then you could have done that. And again, the open median may have been placed there for one single-family home, but with 50, that changes the equation. Well, no, the open median was there for Kingston Pike to make left turns in and out of Kingston Road. Actually, the access to the existing farm was further up towards the country club. It wasn't across from Kingston Road. I think it's more of, how did we get there? Like, was that something you all proposed? And then, you know, I think that's what we're concerned about, is how do we get there, why did it get removed? And then, you know, making sure that we're just following what the development plan that's approved by the Planning Commission said you would do. So that's from a contractual standpoint, right? And I can't recall how we got working with the Transportation Cabinet to create the left turn lane in. That's been built, and to turn it into a standard intersection. And the island in the middle is more for hiding the utilities. Avoiding or working around the utilities more than creating a right out. Well, we'll review the ordinance and let you know by the end of the day if you need to go to the Planning Commission for action. I've got Rob McGoodwin, the developer here. I don't know, Rob, do you want to say anything? Good morning, everyone. I'm Rob McGoodwin, the developer. A question came up about, on the interior side, how the access is going to be for lot number 1 and 2 and lot 37 and 38. We now have median islands in there. And on the left-hand side of, well, the front side of lot number 1 is a tree protection area. We are going to put an access easement across lot 2 that avoids the tree protection area into lot 1. And then the same condition will exist without the tree on lot 37 to access lot 38. So once you go into the development, you'll turn through each one of those two lots to get to the lot that faces Perispike. So that needs to be denoted on the plat. Can I answer any other questions at this time? I've got one little thing. I may have sent this straight to Roy, but on lot number 8, the address is missing on that lot, on this plan you submitted. The one up there on Pine Tree or whatever it's called. Pine Knot. Pine Knot, yeah. The one up there on Pine Tree or whatever it's called. Pine Knot. Pine Knot, yeah. All the rest of the plots have the address on it, but it's missing on lot number 8. It's 2385 is missing on that lot. We'll get that for you. Yeah. I think I may have sent that straight to Roy instead. I'm not sure if it's in the comments or not. Pine Top. Pine Top. Pine Top. All right. All right. Anybody else? Okay. So staff has recommended approval, so the motion will be for approval of PLN FRP 2532, Quintana Estates, with the addition of note number 8 to add access easements to lot 2 and 38. Oh, 37. That's okay. Remove note number 4 under plans, questions, or concerns, and remove number 6, Department of Environmental Quality's approval of environment-sensitive areas. It's a condition of sign-off. So moved. Second. All in favor? Is anyone opposed? All right. Motion passes. Thank you. Okay. We're going to move forwards now. We're going into the first development plan, MJDP 2564, Wolf Run Industrial Park, lot 1 amended. We've seen this a few times. This is Old Frankfort Pike down through here, and this is Frankfort Court. We have a proposal for several buildings for office and storage, and on this we have two access points coming in here and over here. If you remember, we had floodplain, a large detention easement that actually they don't have shown on here, but it goes through the middle of this building in the rear. This is Old Frankfort Pike, so there's a Frankfort Pike corridor, landscape corridor that needs to be met along here. They do have several trees that they are saving. They have a couple large trees in here that we were asked for them to be saved. There's an access point. This was an old driveway that went onto the farm, and this is to be removed. And so with that, requirements not met, denote all buildings, paving signs, fences, walls. This is a note from building inspection. Denote structures built in areas of alluvial soils with a foundation footer detail prepared by a licensed professional engineer prior to issuance of building permit. That's environmental. Denote this plan shall comply with Article 19 of the zoning ordinate. As I said, there's a floodplain along the rear portion of the property. Provide dumpster enclosures and pad specifications. Change building letters to numbers. Provide open space exhibit and include open space requirements in the site statistics. Denote adjacent properties with dash lines. Addition of adjacent property information. Correct note number 19 referencing old Frankfort Pike landscape ordinance. Ordinance number 13489. They just made reference to the landscape ordinance, and they dropped the old Frankfort Pike. Depicting existing detention easement. Denote council resolution of release of easement in addition of vegetative buffer and maintenance note. Denote address on each building. Addition of steep slope note from previous plan. Delete note number 20 referencing site plan for fire hydrants. They had two notes for the fire department. Clarify location of eighth light on the lighting plan. You said you have eight, and I couldn't find the eighth light. Addition of tree preservation note from previous plan. Remove extra commission certification. You have two certifications. One should it go in front of the planning commission, and one just in front of the technical committee. Remove one that you don't need. Remove access point to old Frankfort Pike per final record plat J241. That's the old farm road that I pointed out right here. This needs to be removed. Design considerations. See all comments provided by the division of engineering. Number two, new trees planted within 15 feet of existing overhead. Utilities need to have matured height of under 30 feet and under 75 feet if within 30 feet. New transformers underground or overhead to feed new buildings will require truck accessibility and meet clearance requirements to building and other underground facilities. Explain stormwater management proposal. Plan questions or concerns. Discuss the timing of release of the detention easement. Clarify proposed land use. The light industrial zone limits the office uses to 60% of the total square footage. They had listed office storage, and we didn't know exactly how that was being broken down. At this time, the staff has the sign offs listed as engineering, traffic, landscape, addressing, urban forester, department of environmental quality, bike ped, open space, division of fire, division of waste management, documentation of division water quality for approval of capacity, the United States Postal Service, and then 13 correct all note deficiencies listed as requirements not met. This time, I'm opening it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions and if anyone can be removed from this as a sign off. No other comments or questions? Applicant? So, good morning. For those of you that don't know me, I'm Josh Despain with Contour Collaborative. We're working with the owner for this property. We're optimistic that the third time is a charm. This one, for whatever reason, does look to be an older version of what was submitted, but I can go ahead and address the comments that we were provided. Thank you. In general, I don't think, yes, with the big offsets and that, but I can still speak to this one. As far as note one, that would be something we're obviously in the process of still completing the design architecturally, but those will all be addressed. Nothing expected there. As far as the soils go, we've got the geotech scheduled for two weeks from now, and so we will have that for structural foundations, all that good stuff. The note number three, again, as expected, no issue there. Same for dumpster enclosures and addressing. As far as open space, we'll provide the full exhibit on that, but this development right there does not exist in the updated plan, so we have lots of green space that we can utilize down there for the open space. Let's see here. Old Frankfurt, as far as the access from here, we just haven't done a development plan, but there is no intention of using any access off of Old Frankfurt there. I think there is a question of, with the offsets that we have for our tree protection, how far back do we really need to take the demo of that? And for any of the pavement in the easement, how do you want us to handle that, that kind of stuff, but no deal breakers there. Let's see. As far as the detention easement, we will provide the documents that we have for that. The information that we've gotten for the release of that, there is a document in book 4153, page 644, that was signed September 2nd by Mayor Gordon. So that's the information that we're going off of there. To that, there was a question about the stormwater and detention. The plan right now is that we'll use the center area for rain garden area. We'll then have to use part of this as a combo detention, quality easement, that kind of stuff. But essentially, knowing that, what we had originally shown, we've got to stay out of our buffer area there, so that's why we're going to change that to that part. Let's see here. Lighting plan, that's pretty straightforward. Same for 16, 15, 17, and 18. As far as any of the design considerations, totally get all those planning questions. I've already kind of skipped ahead to the detention easement. As far as the use, this is majority warehouse storage with basically the ability to supplement with some small office space for each unit as needed. But again, the intent is that this is primarily a warehouse industrial storage, that kind of deal. The owner is also here with me. If you could label the buildings, for instance, if building one, I think addressing wants you to change from A to B, or are they A, B, C, D, and they need to be 1, 2, 3, 4? They need to be numbers, we don't use letters. If building one, the small one, is all office, just go ahead and label that as an office. If the rest of them are mostly, and I think what we had maybe talked to you about in person, was shops of special trade, which is also B4I1 use, that just left that with accessory office space. So that it's clear that you're not trying to push up against that 60% office number. Because what happens is you get to building inspection and they're like, hey, what percentage are you office? And they'll start to keep track on each building. And it gets... No, no issue there. It holds up permits and gets complicated. So if you just label those. As I told Cheryl, we'll make sure we get our wording right on that too. Yeah, yeah, yeah. She told me, I think it's offices, you know, shops of special trade. And I said, well, that, yeah, that's not what it says. So, yeah. Thank you. Thank you. And do you want us to delete the plan that was not supposed to be reviewed? Yes, please. Okay. If you'll send Cheryl an email and let her know which one got uploaded and shouldn't have been in there, we can delete those. No, not a problem. Sorry about the confusion there. I got a quick question. This is Scott Burton, Waste Management. This area is zoned industrial, so you wouldn't necessarily have to have a dumpster enclosure. If they choose to put one there, we would need it to reflect our updated service guide, which really, in this case, it would just involve a few more bollards. If they choose not to do the enclosure, we would still want the concrete pad and the four bollards there to keep the dumpsters on the pad. So, really, the only thing I would need to see is what they decide to go with, but I wouldn't need to see the details on the concrete pad and the bollards. Okay. Not a problem. All right. Anybody else? All right. The recommendation is for postponement of PLN-MJDP-25-64 Wolf Run Industrial Park with no changes, so moved. Second. All in favor? Is anyone opposed? Thank you all. May I ask a clarification question? Are we still good to submit this for review again at the next TRC meeting? Yes. I was just saying to Chris, are they aware they need to come back to TRC, clarify all those issues, we'll get the right plan, and then typically we'd be moving to approval. Yeah. And whatever deed book page you referenced that the mayor signed, if you can add that to a cell or two so we have that document. Thanks. All right. Moving along. Our next plan, MJDP-25-67 Margaret C. Kamick, W.E. Savage Property. This is at 4630 Old Schoolhouse Lane. The purpose of the plan is to propose a senior living facility, 10 single-family residential lots, and one HOA lot on a portion of the site. Excuse me. So this depicts the overall site. Originally on the preliminary subdivision plan, there was more shown in the front portion where Old Schoolhouse Lane comes in. This plan is depicting a senior living facility in this location with the associated parking, and then 10 single-family homes where Rema Way comes through. This is Agape here. Agape comes through. Currently it's Stubbs here and here, and Rema as well, Stubbs, at either side of the property. So this proposal shows the continuation of Agape and Rema through the property. There's a floodplain in the rear of the property. The single-family homes are shown outside, for the most part, outside the floodplain. Then the senior living facility is actually quite a bit higher toward the middle of the property. Under requirements not met, number one, denote all building paving, signs, fences, walls, and retaining walls that are depicted, described, or required on this development plan should require a separate review and building permit from the Division of Building Inspection prior to construction. Number two, structures built on areas of alluvial soils will have a foundation and footer detail prepared by a licensed professional engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit. Number three, denote no buildings or structures shall be located on any land with a slope greater than 30%. For areas with slopes between 15% and 30%, the provisions of Article 611 of the Land Subdivision Regulations shall be applicable. Number four, denote the location of the fire hydrant's fire department or fire service features, if required, shall be approved by the Division of Fire. Number five, denote no land disturbance, construction, clearing of native vegetation, or mowing shall occur in the vegetative buffer zone. Invasive species may be removed by handheld equipment or a forestry grinder. Number six, all pavement markings aside from standard parking stalls shall be thermoplastic. Number seven, provide dumpster enclosure and pad specifications. Number eight, correct address of parcel 12 to 4734 Rema Way. Number nine, provide open space exhibit and include open space requirements in the site statistics as a percentage. Number 10, provide record plat designation. Number 11, include north arrow on vicinity map. Number 12, remove the gap match line in the detail drawing. I'll go back just for a second to make sure. On this detail, it shows a gap, but it appears as if the scale is the same. Those could be one graphic. It does kind of skew the dimensions on the property lines when you're trying to look at it at a larger scale. Number 13, remove the 500-year floodplain and differentiate line types for floodplain and vegetative buffer. Number 14, denote all existing and proposed easements. Number 15, denote timing and maintenance responsibility for the seven and a half foot sidewalk easement. That's shown on plan south. It looks like it goes all the way through from Rema to Agape. Number 16, provide tree inventory map and tree preservation plan that will comply with the zoning ordinance article 26-4 B and C. Number 17, depict sidewalk rather than a sidewalk easement. Number 18, install either choker islands, bulb outs, or propose a location for a couple of speed tables. At this time, there are no waivers requested or identified. Design considerations review all ASELA comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Then under plan questions or concerns, discuss the vehicular use area in front of the senior living facility. The ordinance states that there's no VUA between the principal structure and the street. This is the principal structure here. We do have a little bit of VUA shown forward of that. Discuss whether assisted living or nursing services will be provided. If either are, then that requires a conditional use permit through the Board of Adjustment. Number three, discuss opening of Agape Drive, removal of permanent barricade at northern terminus point, Council Resolution 610-2014. Number four, discuss density change and land use change. The preliminary subdivision plan showed the front portion of the property developed as well. We just want to try to understand what the change in density will be. Number five, discuss ownership and maintenance of stormwater management areas. Then under the sign-offs, we have engineering, traffic engineering, landscaping, addressing, urban forester, Department of Environmental Quality, bike ped, open space, division of fire, division of waste management, division of water qualities approval, capacity assurance program requirements, United States Postal Service, and finally, to correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met herein. And then just as a note, this plan and waiver request will be heard by the subdivision committee on December 4th and the planning commission on December 11th based on an expired preliminary development plan associated with the zone change. And with that, I'll open it up to the committee if anybody needs to be removed or for any discussion. This is something for the planning commission to talk about. So I will add that Kristen mentioned we have had several public comments into the planning mailbox about concerns about the new revised plan which does change the density that had been approved by the planning commission. And that's the reason we're asking that the subdivision committee and ultimately the planning commission hear this plan is the changes because the preliminary plan did expire. Yes, there's a preliminary subdivision plan, but this is not in line with that. And the applicant understood that. So those are going to be the opportunity for the public to speak to the planning commission members about the change of use. At this point, we're really concerned about technical issues. So if they're typically we don't have the public speak at technical review committee. If you have a concern that's related to engineering, I would suggest emailing our TRC members in engineering or if it's a bike pedestrian, Scott, and people's names are up here on there. We can tell you their names to convey those technical concerns or questions. And that's really the best way to address that. Anything? Good morning. Steve Garland with Prime AE, engineers on this project. William Horton is the engineer on this one, but he's sick and couldn't be here tonight or this morning. So I'm filling in. Yeah, that's what happens when you get called in off the bench. And with me is Johan Graham with AU Associates. So we've looked over the staff report. We understand most of it, have discussion items, and we discuss that now. Correct, Tracy? So number one, discuss the vehicular use area. It took me a few minutes to figure this one out, but I think we have one and a half parking stalls that are extending past the face of the building. Is that correct? We can move those back by the dumpster. Yep, exactly. And number two, discuss whether assisted living or nursing services will be provided. This will be an independent senior living, similar to what we're doing out on Wellington. Then the next one, I'm going to sidestep on. Yeah. Just kind of walk you through a little bit about what we've, I know we have lots of neighbors here today. Johan Graham with AU Associates with the applicant, and we've met with them twice now. And what we've pledged for them to do is to go through technical review committee and subdivision committee, and if recommended for approval, we're still going to ask for a postponement at our first planning commission meeting. This is really a collection for us. The first month is a collection of discussion topics and things we want to bring forth with the neighborhood through the subdivision committee and technical review committee, so we can go back to them and make as many changes to the plan that meet both of our needs before we go to the planning commission, and they offer comments, and we welcome them to make comments to the planning commission, too. But we kind of want to flesh out some of these things and then go back to them before we go to the planning commission. So the agape drive extension and opening was one of those comments that I wanted to kind of flesh out in more of a public setting in front of staff. So installing agape drive, or I guess building agape drive, and servicing it from the English station side is sufficient for our use. Now, I know that may not be sufficient for staff and planning, but I wanted to get that out there that we don't think we have to have that terminus point between agape and the Dogwood Trace neighborhood opened for our particular project. But I know that's maybe not the overall wishes of maybe a greater body. But it is not necessary for our particular plan, which is just the 45 units of senior housing. So I know that's going to be a topic of discussion going forward because right now it's closed by council and they have to reopen it by, I don't know, ordinance or statute or whatever they have to do to reopen that. Obviously, opening it up doesn't hurt us at all as well, but I know that's a big discussion point for the neighbors that they want to talk about more at the planning commission. So I wanted to kind of, if we could, flesh out, I don't know, Tracy's staff recommendation or Chris' staff, what you guys would want to have happen and maybe why. And then as I talked to the neighbors and we talked to the planning commission, what the process would be to open it back up or how it could be opened back up, or if this plan could proceed without it being opened back up, what are the potential options for us that, since the neighbors are here and we're going to be talking about this openly, I just want to make sure they understand what we can do as the applicant and what we can't do. So the division of planning, the adopted ordinances and regulations require public streets to connect. So that is why the plans that have been approved showed connecting streets. The resolution adopted by the council, we'll have to get that worked through with the council, but the planning commission is sort of the responsible party for creating the road networks in the community, ensuring that neighborhoods are connected so that people can get from their neighborhood to destinations that are desirable. And in this case, there's a shopping center that's accessible via Agape Drive to the south. The Bellary-Kroger area. Right, across the county line, but would be beneficial to anyone who lives north of this property to be able to get to without going to Harrisburg Road. So the connection of our local streets and collector streets, it's a network, it's an important network that benefits both sides. So from our perspective, streets need to be connected. They're public streets. Yes, people park on them. Yes, people drive on them. For everybody's benefit, right? Thank you. So technically in terms of, I guess maybe procedurally instead of technically, so as we work toward the planning commission, the road at the planning commission will show to be open. If the planning commission approves that way, that doesn't necessarily, so how does that work with the ordinance that's in place, or what's the procedure for that? We're reaching out to the council member to ensure that we can have a discussion with them about... So that's still a topic. Rectifying the resolution that was adopted. We can't, that has to be resolved at the planning, by the time we get the planning commission potentially, by the time the planning gets approved? I'm not sure it has to be resolved by then, certainly if you're building it. Okay. I think it doesn't really make sense to build two streets up next to each other and have a barricade in the middle of it, and it causes a lot of frustration and confusion when the roads are named the same for our fire, our police, the postman, the Amazon driver, everyone. I just want to make sure I'm being transparent with the neighbors and the staff and you guys, what expectations might be, what I can control, what I can't control. So having a barricade there when the road doesn't exist is fine. It creates a safety information for the person driving on Agape that says, hey, I can't go any further. But once the road is built, there really shouldn't be a barricade anymore. Perfect. Thank you for explaining. Does that cover that discussion, Adam, probably? Did we fully get through that one? I probably. I'm sorry. Thank you. I think number four, discuss density change and land use change. So what I can speak to probably exclusively is this roughly three-acre track that we're purchasing from the Cowgills. So we're purchasing the top button. So we're purchasing exclusively this almost three-acre tract of land from the Cowgills. So on the development plan side, that's what we'll be building for the independent senior living. It's 45 units. That unit per acre is 16.4 units per acre. And I think in the top right box of the development plan, let me see if I can even figure this out, up here shows our floor area coverage and lot ratio for the senior living portion of the site, which is roughly half of what's allowed in the R3. I can't see the numbers exactly from here, but I have a recollection that's roughly half of what's allowed in the R3. What I probably can't speak to is if the Cowgills plan to sell that property in the future, both the left and right side of our property, or what their plans are for what to put on that site. So in terms of density, land use change for our three-acre portion, that's kind of more of what I can address in front of this body. So I think from an engineering perspective, is where you're building Agape and your development is east, your infrastructure is also going east, right? Your stormwater and your sanitary. So even though you're just buying three acres, who or how are we connecting down to the flood, where the lines are in the floodplain? You got that. Yeah, and from my perspective, I'm looking at it from the owner's perspective, I'm looking at it from two different points of view. So Steve's going to talk more about this, but one is our parking lot and building pad toward Agape, how we're retaining that water, because that's our flat portion of the site. And then from Agape down the steep slope toward the back, how we're dealing with that water runoff going toward Rima, the future houses on Rima potentially, and into the floodplain. So from my perspective, that's how I'm looking at it. So Agape is at the ridge, it's at the top. So that's where it's going to break both directions, you are correct. I ran a quick stream stats looking at what our site is to the rest of the watershed. The watershed at our property line is 5.5 square miles, 3,560 acres. We are 0.12% of the watershed, and by the stormwater manual, if you're 10% or less, you can do a watershed study to show that detention may be exempted. So that's what I'm going to explore first. And so that's what I'm going to explore first. Then if that's not possible, we've done underground detention before, we have a leasing office, we'll have staff on site, correct? Yeah. So we have AU Associates as a business, we have maintenance, so we can handle it through that. We can do some green infrastructure, terracing. There's other ways to handle the small amount of increase that would come off from this development. There's a stormwater, I think, easement on the Rema Way side, which I think we'll likely have to utilize, and I'm not sure technical terms, if I understand all the what has to happen, but I think my objective is retain the water on the front half of the senior living site where it's flatter, and then we'll have to figure out how to divert pipe down the hill, because there's not really a way to retain that water at that slope. So I think that's what the easement's for, but we'll have to figure out exactly where that easement, I think it's shown in the plan, but how to collect the water and divert it through that easement, not to impact those potential lots on the back side of the site. From the owner's perspective, that's kind of my plan for what to do. A couple of site issues, and Steve, the wheel stop shown in that parking lot, adjacent to those ADA spaces and things of that nature, you may not need that. You might be able to just curb that and have your – you've got a sidewalk that comes from the public right of way up to the building. Generally, we don't like to use wheel stops when there's kind of a maintenance issue, and they can be a trip hazard and the curb works better. So just let's talk about that at some point as to how that flushes out and what you actually need and what you're trying to do with that space, and if we can do it differently to eliminate that, we'd probably like to do that. I think the other issue that I think David brought up in traffic was we're showing a sidewalk easement, and you'd mentioned that. You all aren't concerned with that lower access, but we are primarily because we can't build an ADA-compliant sidewalk in that 7-1⁄2-foot easement that you're showing going down that really steep slope. So you all are going to have to propose, work with the CalGIL group, what that's going to look like and how that's going to work. Yeah, that was – and that's a good question. So, Scott, I think that's where I'll probably be talking to you a little bit more. As a project that has potentially federal funds in it, all of our site infrastructure amenity paths have to be ADA, and that's a complicated task on this site if we're showing that. Showing the easement doesn't cause us a problem, but building it is potentially problematic. So I need to work through with you to understand more about the Greenway Plan, how that has to work, what type of thing, and when it has to be built, because a fully ADA path there is a much more complicated endeavor than just a sidewalk easement that's shown. So I've got to kind of work through that with you, potentially, to figure out how we do that. I think my understanding from the notes and from the past is the Greenway Plan calls for that connection, so I've got to figure out what calls for that connection means, and figure out what's the best way on a federally funded site to build a path which is going to be considered an amenity that has to be accessible from my perspective on our funding sources. Right, and that's our concern is that even if you didn't have to build it, we couldn't build it. So it's a moot point, right? So there has to be, well, we can... Yes, I think we're on the same page with my question about how and how and why. And the only terminology, Scott, I found was on the old previous plans, it was labeled sidewalk easement in plan view, but then the note calls it a path or a trail. And the codes, as you know, are different, so we need to dive down to see which one it technically is. Yeah, yes. And you're referring to what we classify it as, correct? Correct. Like shared use path versus sidewalk. Right. Let's see. On the other thing, Steve, note number 27, I said everything is thermoplastic. Well, note number 20 says... 27. Well, I'm looking at note number 20. It says meaningful access. Oh. I would love to know what meaningful... Oh, you're talking back to the Greenway note. Yeah, that's that leftover note from the previous plans that you have to carry forward. Okay. The planning commission added that note at the zone change because they were concerned. You just need to know if meaningful is ADA accessible or meaningful is not ADA accessible. So I think a point of clarification is relevant at this point. Yeah, and that note, I think, applies further down to the Rima-Larissa side into the Greenway. But from my perspective, it kind of carries all the way back up through to Agape, too. Okay. Yeah. On Agape, the previous discussions were at the time that the CalGO did not want to build traffic calming into their plan. So that was where the fund discussions took place. If that note is going to go away with the funding, then something needs to be shown for your proposal to just not show any kind of bulb outs or traffic calming along Agape because some of the concerns expressed by the neighbors at the previous plan was their concerns about the speed of vehicles and things for making that connection on Agape. So just incorporate it into your design. So I'm going to catch the owner up because he's looking for the note that we removed. Hey. Well, in the previous traffic engineering, it was something like create an account and put $5,000 per speed table or something and basically write a check to traffic engineering for them to build speed tables. And going looking at it through again, the intersections to the north and south are 500 feet apart. So we're not very wide. We're almost like a piano key. But we'll talk with you. You know the ones I like. I like those squeezums, chicaneries, however you say it. I have no objection to that. And I think that's about it. We'll take out the match line. What we were trying to show is the vegetated buffer on that enlargement. We put a header under it or a legend under it trying to make that meet the requirements of showing the vegetated buffer. And we'll get rid of the brake line and the dumpster pad. I think that's it. I got one more thing here. Tracy touched on this. So on the off chance that Agape becomes permanently closed, I can't have the same street name on both sides of a permanently closed road. So in your case, Agape has to go away with your new street name. We can't have two street names on a permanently closed. If it stays open, great. But this is also part of the issue I have down on Larissa and Rema. So Agape starts like three or four subdivisions north of us. I know. So we're going to change like at the property line? No, you can't change at a property line. It has to change at intersections. So it has to change at intersections, and that's where we come up with the problem down at Rema and Larissa. I cannot change street names in the middle of a street. It must change at intersections. I think they're telling us that we have to show them being connected. And that's great. Until it's not great. I think he's warning you. If for some reason the barricade stays up, it's not just affecting your tenants, right? The city has to rename a street if it's not connected because of fire safety. Again, if you have two streets that appear on a map to be connected and the fire department comes and there's a barricade, I mean, Rob's in trouble, we're in trouble, like how do we create that mess, right? So we're trying to avoid that. And then the state's going to come back to us too because they're going to reject our center lines. So that's all we have. I've got one more quick question for you here. Scott Burton, Waste Management. Hey, Scott. The enclosure, will it be required or is it, I think I was looking at a different plan, but to be ADA compliant? Yes. It will be? Yes. Okay. And we've got an ADA compliant detail with the side doors and all this stuff now. So we've got the detail and the detail for the pad as well on plan. Anybody else? I do want to reiterate that if anyone from the public has comments, they can e-mail those to the planning mailbox. That way we can forward those concerns on to the applicant as well as we'll have record of those. We do appreciate you coming here today and being here, but that's the best way for us to handle those as it relates to this committee. Okay. Anybody else? Okay. So the staff recommendation is for approval of PLNMJDP 257, Margaret C. Kammack property with, I don't think we had any changes. So moved. Second. All in favor? Is anyone opposed? All right. Okay. We're going to move forwards to MJDP 2570 Park Hills Shopping Center, lot three amended. This is located over off of Pimlico Parkway. We have Pimlico Parkway coming through here. We have Man O' War along here. We have headed out this way is Richmond Road just tonight. The last time we, well, one of the big last times we've seen this was they came in and did right in, right out, right here on to Man O' War Boulevard in the shopping center. But today they've come in to work with the Goodwill that's located back here. Here's our main entrance off. We go back here to the Goodwill. They're proposing a drive-through adjacent for drop-off to the Goodwill shop, therefore changing the traffic flow along here. I believe, yeah, this is Spud's Sports Bar here on the other side of this drive aisle. So with that, we have the notes, requirements not met, structures built in areas of alluvial soils will have foundation footers, denote no buildings or structures shall be located on any land with a slope greater than 30%, denote pavement markings shall conform with the traffic engineering standards guidelines, include open space requirements in the site statistics as a percentage, delineate the centerline of the blue line stream on the property, orient the vicinity sketch to match the plan, addition of contour elevations, addition of all easements from Platte S367, addition of note number 18 from previous plan in reference to the waivers that were granted, revise outdoor lighting plan to meet all requirements of Argo 30, addition of missing information for direction of drive aisles and stop bars from previous plan. Please list significant trees in a single note and provide the RLA stamp or ISA certified arborist name. Provide sidewalk from, excuse me, provide sidewalk from all adjacent right of ways to the building entrance that comply with the zoning ordinance 16-6. Design considerations, review all the comments provided by the Division of Engineering, provide sign exhibit for how the one-way scenario will work to the rear. With this being two-way currently, we just want to make sure we are, when we circle around, when you go out through this way, how are you going to direct people to get, because this is a long shopping center, to get out from behind here. There's another access point back here to Pimlico. How will you get, how will they circle around on the property? Drive aisle in the area of the compactor enclosure needs to be 20 feet. Plan questions or concerns. Will current dumpster location change? Describe how drainage areas in the rear of the development are usable and accessible with a sidewalk. Discuss reconfiguration of internal circulation and intersections. Discuss construction of sidewalk to Pimlico Parkway at the time of the canopy of construction. This property is on B6P and we have a multi-modal plan. With that, we're looking for how will someone who is at the Goodwill be able to use sidewalks to get to Pimlico Parkway. With this being the same property owner, we believe they can work together to get that sidewalk to the, from the store itself out to the road on here. When they came in for development for the McDonald's, they have a connection out to the road. So we're looking for a connection from the shopping area out to Pimlico Parkway. The sign offs, are there concrete dividers for the drive through and the bypass lane? As far as the staff requirements, we have engineering, traffic, landscape examiner, urban forester, environmental quality, bike and ped, open space, fire, division waste management, documentation of division water quality, the U.S. Postal Service, and then correct all note deficiencies as listed. This requirement is not met here on. So at this current time, I'm asking if there's any comments or questions or anyone that can be removed from this plan. You can take us off. Addressing can be removed. Yeah, you can remove us. Anyone else have any other comments or questions? Yes, Scott. You can take waste management off. I know what they're like. So do we want to take the plan questions or concerns? Will the current dumpster location change? Will you move that too? I spoke with the property management out there, and I think the current business that's in that is going to be relocated. I don't know within that shopping center, but when they do, they're just because Goodwill is going to have a compactor. So they won't. Those dumpsters are placed out there by the Compass Capital with the property management. So they'll just relocate them when they're. So we're good. So go ahead and remove you as a sign-off, but also remove condition number one under plan questions. Yes. Okay. Anyone else have any other comments, questions? If not, applicant. Good morning. Brad Boaz with CMW. I think a lot of the requirements not met are cleanup items that we can take care of. Question on lighting. Who is now – is Boyd still doing lighting? Who's doing lighting? Cheryl, you too? Okay. So we'll work together on doing that. On the – I guess the sidewalks, jumping to that one. That might be the biggest one. So I guess, obviously, for the Goodwill, they've got the sidewalks straight to Main O'War, and then we do have the frontages along all the shopping centers to the – at least to the gas station. I guess where – how do we – yeah, there we go. Sorry. I guess that's Scott. Is that Scott or traffic question there? I think each time that this comes in, we talk about the main access off of Pimlico and the lack of sidewalks there. And, you know, when they did the write-in, write-out, it was like, well, we're on this side of the property, we're okay. Now we're not on that side of the property. And so we want to address the sidewalk access into this development as a part of this development plan, as a part of the requirement for their access. So there's the ordinance piece, and then there's the multimodal piece. And so they've shown access from that entrance that's closer to McDonald's up there on their multimodal plan, and we believe that this plan kicks that in. But going through an adjacent parcel? They're owned by the same company. Yeah. And so, yes, it is an adjacent parcel, but, yes, it is a health, safety, and welfare issue for people accessing the development through that access, and they do. And then I think there's also some discussion from traffic about what that kind of convoluted intersection down there, where that all meets, might be something that you'll improve as a part of this, because that would help with your sidewalk access and your crossings and all the other things to bring this up to what that multimodal plan showed for this development. So I guess, Steve, do you have a thought, or is that just we've got to sit down and hash that out? I think we'll have to sit down and hash it out. Me and David always have opinions, but we understand. Yeah. We want to work with you to provide for a safe environment that works for your client but also provides a safety and meets the goals of getting pedestrians out to Pimlico. So just, again, just, and again, Scott, we'll get together and talk about it, but I guess the question is, the idea you're saying is Pimlico to just the Goodwill, that strip of the part of the center. Is that? We're talking about the access that's closest to the fast food. That's kind of outside of the Man O' War access. That's the main access to this property. Right. Well, I'm saying the neighborhood is up here to the page north. In terms of just getting sidewalks to here, does it make sense that it has to come all the way to the Pimlico entrance as opposed to finding a route that gets them a shorter route? Yeah. There's transit access out there. I mean, it's not just coming from the neighborhood. Right. Yeah, we want to address the main entrance access as a part of the multimodal plan that's submitted for this plan. Okay. Yeah, I'm just looking at how we get the shortest route, which people are going to take the sidewalk there or not. Right. I think his point is the shortest route for the person who lives north. Who's coming from the other direction. But what about the person who is coming from the south or the east? So wherever there's a vehicular entrance, people will walk, so we need a sidewalk. So that's what we're talking about here. Right. I get you. I get the whole logic of how people travel. Yeah, absolutely. But they also walk in that existing entrance, and they're mixed with vehicular traffic in a very not best practice type of looking intersection. So from a health safety welfare perspective, it's time to fix that. Okay. If you want to provide, I mean, it would be fantastic if you provided one from people coming from the north. People coming from the neighborhood behind. Sure. And the neighborhood coming from Man o' War. That would be fantastic. We would be in favor of that. And they did a great job off Man o' War. Thank you. That looks great, right? Yes. Like that. Yeah. That's your other entrance. All right. The concrete dividers, the drive-through, is that a, what's the question? Yeah, so we've seen other sites where similar conditions were set up, and the reliance was upon striping. And unless you have a physical barrier there, we have cars that are going the wrong way. And when a pedestrian is crossing there, their thought is this is one-way traffic, and they won't look and realize a car is coming the other way. So in combination with what was just discussed, we thought that providing curb system here would help facilitate the safety of kind of a complicated area. And I think it's a good idea for Goodwill to have that, but we think the curb will help. Make sure I understand. Yep. That was a justification and reasoning of it. And as far as, you've got 16 feet, which is pretty tight behind there. I don't know if the compactor can come closer to the building and get you 20. We'll open that up a little bit more. Perfect. All right. I think that's all I've got. Oh, I guess, Eve, on the open space, the back area is just for not usable. It's just for open space. We don't intend for people to get down there. So vegetated, is that correct? Vegetated, yes. Okay, yes, perfect. Thank you. That's the word. Yeah, we'll make that clarification on the exhibit. All right, thank you. Thank you. All right. Anything else? Anybody else have any questions? All right, so staff recommendation is for approval of PL&M JDP 2570, Park Hill Shopping Center, lot three, with the removal of note number one under plan question and concerns, and then the removal of sign-off for addressing office and the Division of Waste Management. So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? All right, motion passed. Thank you all. All right, moving along. We have a preliminary development plan, MJDP 2559, Lexmark International Corporation, lot one, Legacy Trail, LLC. This is located at 1170 Newtown Pike. The purpose of this plan is to depict the development of an automobile service station and hotel in support of the requested zone change from an agricultural urban AU zone to a corridor business B3 zone. So we have Newtown Pike right here. This is the existing Legacy Trail that comes through. This is Nandino Lane, which is across from, is it Nandino Road? Boulevard. Boulevard. I couldn't think of it. Driven it plenty of times. They're depicting an automobile service station and a hotel. This is Nandino Lane here. Let me go back. There is also a floodplain that runs through the northern part of the property. So under requirements not met, number one, denote structures built in areas of alluvial soils without foundation and footer detail prepared by a licensed professional engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. Number two, no buildings or structures shall be located on any land with a slope greater than 30%. Number three, identify the center line of the blue line stream on the property. And again, that's to the north. Addition of assigned addresses provided by the addressing office. Number five, provide open space exhibit that corresponds to the site statistics and include open space requirements and site statistics as a percentage. Correct note number 14, denote review and recommendations of Royal Springs Wellhead Protection Committee. Submit tree inventory map as a separate document and add generalized note calling out any significant trees. Two 35-foot crossings must be altered to a raised crossing or add bump outs at each crossing location. Dimension the connection between the two lots and the radius of each commercial driveway. On the initial submittal, it did show a connection between the two lots here and on the revised plan, that connection appears to have been removed. Number 11, depict the driveways as having concrete aprons. Number 12, move the sidewalks to the back of the right-of-way rather than directly on the street as is typical for public-private cross sections to match subdivision regulations for similar cross sections. Number 13, automobile service station within 1,000 feet spacing from another station is required. Number 14, denote cross section of Newtown Pike. Number 15, depict stacking to pickup window. Number 16, dimension all driveways and walkways. Number 17, remove all structures from FEMA floodplain. And under waivers, waiver of the zoning ordinance article 8-20B3, the spacing of automobile service stations. There are a few in the general vicinity within that 1,000 foot, particularly to the south. Design considerations. Number one, see Acela comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Number two, legacy trail alignment shown does not match the previous plats. Number three, verify the canopy heights of both automobile service station and hotel entrance are at least a minimum of 13 feet and six inches. Number four, double dumpster enclosure without gates will require six bollards along the back wall of the enclosure. Number five, discuss the front yard limitations for VUA on law one. Under plan questions and concerns, discuss additional 17 foot depicted for pavement width. Number two, the proposed development does not appear to have an existing service connection to public sanitary sewer. Where will the proposed facility connect to public sewer? Number three, does this plan comply with the state statutes and regulations concerning fuel tanks in and near floodplains? Number four, to the proposed facilities is via an existing access easement almost completely in the floodplain. Number five, what is a movable waterline easement? Number six, discuss whether Nandino Lane is intended to be dedicated as a private street or access easement. Number seven, discuss timing of roadway and trail improvements. Number eight, discuss compliance with zoning ordinance article 19-7A2. Number nine, discuss place builder criteria. And then the standard sign-offs, well first provided the Urban County Council approves the zone change. Otherwise any commissioning action of approval is null and void. And then sign offs for engineering, traffic engineering, urban forest or open space, Department of Environmental Quality, and then finally correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met herein. And with that I'll open it up if there's anybody that wants to be removed or if we have any discussion or questions. Again, my name is Tom Hatfield. I'm with EA Partners. Got alongside a representative of Wawa, which is the user of the convenience gas station. Most of the items on here are are agreeable. I think the biggest change in the plan that was submitted and uploaded was that the connection between the hotel and the convenience store has been removed. We obviously need a waiver for the thousand-foot separation between service stations. We're prepared to do that. Just a couple, most of the items on here can be addressed very easily as far as dumpster enclosure dimensions, that kind of thing. The additional 17 feet on the pavement, the existing access through there is 24 feet wide. We're bringing this up to a non-residential standard even though it is still shown as depicted as an access easement. We're bringing the access off of Nandino up to the 41 foot of width. We can discuss the locations of the sidewalk adjacent to the road. Moving them away actually helps us raise these things up to an up-and-over type intersection, concrete aprons. Rory and I have discussed that. As far as the statutes with respect to underground storage tanks adjacent to floodplain, we'll just have to research that. Underground storage tanks construction has evolved over the last 30 years so you don't have those types of issues anymore I would suspect, but we'll just have to research that. Access within a floodplain, obviously we're going to have to study this area and either submit a CLOMR or an appeal to the floodplain committee, so we certainly don't intend to build a street or any structures within a floodplain without having studied it and gotten approvals. The intent of this is to leave this access as an access easement, not a public street. It's not going anywhere other than to the Lexmark property, so we would prefer to leave it as an access easement owned by the owner of this lot 1 or lot 2. And with that I'll turn it over to... Good morning, happy early Thanksgiving. Thanks for being here everybody. William Hodges with Bowman Engineering. We're representing the Wall Wall portion of this property. We are the engineers and landscape architects for the project. I'll keep it brief because again I think Tom did a good job covering the comments, but a few comments from us. We had submitted the TIM and the open space plan, so I'm not sure. I saw a comment that said that the tree inventory map was still needed to be submitted, but I understood that that was submitted and we were showing that we were meeting all the requirements for those two plans. And then additionally, just high-level, we're fully aware of the coordination that will need to do with the Royal Springs Aquifer Committee. We do have Wall Wall represented here as well, so the entire team is actually pretty well represented this morning. But yeah, as Tom mentioned, the underground storage tanks, that technology and construction methods have evolved significantly over the past several years. And we actually learned last night at the neighborhood meeting interesting fact, and since Wall Wall has been selling fuel since 1996, they hadn't had a single incident of a leakage on any of their thousand-plus stores. So I just wanted to make that known to the staff. And obviously happy to answer any questions you guys have. I have one question regarding the timing of the trail improvements. I think Tom, you addressed those entrance aprons. I think just having that setback will give you what you need to do that, and it helps with the crossings, and it doesn't require you to do the raised crossings in those conditions. But you know, we show it going all the way back to Legacy Trail. Is that something that you all are going to do as a part of the entrance improvements to Newtown Pike? When does that all connect? Because what we see typically is that the portion at the Wall Wall gets built, but then it doesn't, you know, obviously it connects back out to the roadway, and that's acceptable. But we just want to understand what the expectation is, so the Planning Commission understands what the expectation is of will that trail connect as a part of this development, or will that trail connect when the next property comes in? And then what about the piece that no property is adjacent to? Because it's all shown on this plan. So just some note, some indication as to what that is, so we know. Okay, yeah, we'll be glad to address that. At this time I can't answer that. Sure, yeah, that's fine. We just wanted, like I said, when people see it, they think it's getting built. And so, you know, just let us know how it's going to go down, please. Thank you. Tom, engineering is going to need some sort of notation on the plan that will address that floodplain issue, because this specific plan has a hotel with the access completely in the floodplain, and that would not be allowed. Yeah, and that's understandable. We obviously, like I said, we can't build a road in a floodplain without getting proper approvals, either a CLOMA or a Floodplain Appeals Committee, or what, without taking a study of that. So yeah, that, we understand that. You mentioned non-residential entrance. A typical non-residential street is 41 feet wide. Okay, so your entrances aren't 41 feet into these properties? No, the Nandino, the access easement coming off of Newtown Pike would be 41 feet wide, with commercial entrances off of that access easement that is built to non-residential standards. Okay, and why was the connection between the two properties removed? Is it just a client preference? Yes. Okay. Now, it is open, and the entrances aren't sold to the office. Do you intend to reconstruct the Nandino Lane? Through the width of the project, yes. That's what that 41 foot section... I would anticipate having to raise it, to raise it up and reconstruct it. Yes. Do you have any notes about, hey, we're going to do a CLOMA? Usually we see notes that say, we're going to do X, Y, Z to address this issue, and because there weren't any notes about any of that, we're all on the table and ready, what are we doing? Yeah. Including the buildings that are in the floodplain, right? Yes, yeah, we understand we can't... The canopy's, like, in the floodplain. Yeah, there'll have to be some analysis done. And Tracy, at some point when it's subdivided, because I think there's going to be two lots here, plus whatever's in the rear, that would need to... couldn't be an access easement. It would be public or private street, correct? Maybe? Tom, just one thing about the sanitary sewer connection. With the tank being next door, you do have some of those facilities. I know this is just a ZDP, but we were just making sure you weren't trying to tie into some of those that are exclusively for the tank. I'm assuming there's a sanitary sewer running parallel to the creek when there's an easement down there. I'm assuming that's where we would have to make a connection. I can speak to that. There is a 30-foot and 10-foot public utility easement that we have from Firms Private on the southwest portion of the site. It runs the entirety of this here, that we would connect into. You would probably be pumping then. We'd have to look into it, yeah. It's a force main that runs along that line. Force main. Yeah, we'll look and see whether we'd have to either pump or connect to the gravity sewer. Well, that's what I was saying with the tank next door. There's some of that that's just exclusive for the tank. But there is a gravity sewer, I believe, down in the floodplain. There is, yeah. I've got a quick comment here. Scott Burton, Waste Management. You've got two different types of dumpster enclosures on this plan. The one at the hotel looks to be just a double enclosure without gates. There is a new detail for that in the service guide. The one at the fuel station, that will also need to be on this plan too for a sign-off. If there's going to be two different types of enclosures, we need to see the details for each one. Again, that's also in the service guide as well. If you all need a newer version of it, I can send you a copy. Sure, yeah, we can add that. Anybody else? All right, the staff recommends postponement of PL&M JDP 2559 Lexmark International Corporation, Allot 1 with no changes. So moved. Second. All in favor? Seeing none, opposed? All right, moving right along. Next plan we're looking at, it's another preliminary development plan associated with a zone change request. MJDP 2568 Hazen Property, Montmullin Street Subdivision, Everett, Lexington, located at 545-553 and 563 South Limestone, 121 Pearl Street and 118 Montmullin Street. The purpose of this plan is to depict a multi-story mixed-use building in support of the requested zone change from single-family residential R1E zone and planned neighborhood residential R3 zone to a neighborhood business B1 zone. So this is South Limestone here. Montmullin is to the north and Pearl is to the south. So this is on a double corner lot. This is the ground floor and then the other floors. So it's showing internal parking with retail and leasing on the first floor. We're showing also internal parking and then the upper floors with residential units and an open air courtyard in the middle. Under the requirements not met, number one, provide an open space exhibit and include open space requirements in the site statistics as a percentage. Number two, correct note for changing article to chapter and it looks like our numbering is off just a little bit. Denote purpose of plan, include north arrow on vicinity map, dimension all driveways, walkways and parking areas, depict location of cross-sections on plan face, submit the tree inventory map as a separate document, depict pedestrian entrances, addition of proposed cross-section for South Limestone to depict how the proposed street trees will work with the building facade and sidewalk space. Under design considerations, see all comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Number two, address sanitary sewer capacity. Number three, explain stormwater management plan. Then under plan questions and concerns, number one, provide dumpster enclosure and pad specifications that comply with the DSG at the time of final development plan. Number two, where's the ramp located on the first floor in the parking structure? Number three, where's dumpster location and how will it be emptied? And number four, discuss place builder criteria. And then we have standard sign-offs including provided the Urban County Council approves the zone change to be one. And then engineering, traffic engineering, urban forest or open space, Department of Environmental Quality. And finally, to correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met herein. And with that, I'll open it up to the committee for discussion, comments, questions. You can remove environmental quality. Any other discussion? All right, applicant. Again, Tom Hatfield with EA Partners. We're in agreement with most of the comments, requirements not met, design criteria, all the dimensions, access. I'll be glad to try to explain the access to where the ramp is in the parking garage. We can work with you guys on that. The dumpster trash will be taken care of by a compactor down in the garage. I've got to work with you. They'll have a private hauler, I believe, that comes by and picks those up. But they'll typically have containers on rollers that they would wheel out of the garage and then have those picked up by a trash collector. It's going to be a dumpster on casters? Is that what you're referring to? Well, I guess it's a small dumpster on rollers that they would roll out to the street. Okay. So we've got row carts just like the Herbies and the recycle carts. They're bigger than a Herbie. Okay. It's probably got casters on it. So just the city don't service those. Yes, we understand that. Stormwater management will be taken care of by more than likely an infiltration basin underneath the parking garage, similar to other student housing projects around. There shouldn't be any quantity controls. This site's all pretty much impervious, but there will be water quality requirements. We'll just have to come up with the best treatment for that. I'd be glad to answer anybody else's specific questions. There was some discussion about there's like a recess in the front of the building that kind of shows that usable space. So we kind of understand, like, you know, it's busy right there, and this is going to add to that busyness. It would be helpful even for the Planning Commission to show that recess in your cross section just grayed out so that they see that the usable width isn't eight feet. It's more like 12 or 15. I just think that would be good for you all. We've got some elevations and details we can provide. And you might add it to the cross section. I don't know if you want to or not, but just something that would help people see that. Okay. Just to confirm, you're going to have a dumpster access? It's not a dumpster. Well, it's a compactor. No trucks coming inside the garage. So they will be set up out in the right-of-way to pull that dumpster forward? Either in the right-of-way. Well, either in the street or, I guess, on the sidewalk or some. Let's come up with some kind of a solution or designated area for these rollers, carts, to be wheeled out, emptied, then wheeled back in by the maintenance crew for the facility. I thought you were going that way, and that's why I understood the access on Mount Mullen, but did not understand the access on PRAWL. If I'm going to have an access point on PRAWL for that dumpster to slide out and then an additional entrance and access point for the vehicles, they'll be coming out the same 50 feet of opening across. Well, no. So just make sure that it's clear, because it wasn't with the submitted plans. The trash room is right there, and they'll get wheeled out through this entrance. I believe this is our trash room. It's right here, and they would get wheeled out through PRAWL Street in usually the same access point as the entrance to the garage. Okay. It's not exactly clear on what's there. I agree with you. Since you've got a first floor, a basement floor, and a second floor, and they all have parking on them, you've got to work a little bit to follow it. We can help clear that up with our details. And then the second question was, are those walls in the garage, or are those columns that are shown with beams? So in the middle of your garage there. I believe they're columns. Okay. If you look at the – well, you can't see it. There are little arrows. There are little arrows right here going in and out below this trash rack. So that's where the location that the compactors will be wheeled out. Okay, thank you. All right. Let's see. Okay. Anybody else have anything? All right. So staff recommends approval of PL&M JDP-2568, Hazen Property, Multnomah Street subdivision, with the removal of Department of Environmental Quality's sign-off. So moved. Second. All in favor? Okay. Moving down the agenda, we're going to MJDP-2571. This is the great house property, the village at Great Acres, Lot 9, amended. Again, this is a zone change also. Here's the property. We're located out off Leestown Road. We have Ruby River. Did I get that right? Ruby River? Here's our lot. It's located right – it backs up to Leestown Road, and here's Ruby River coming in here. So we'll access it here and come in this direction to Ruby River. They're wanting to rezone the property from the R3-B3 to B3 zone. It's actually split zone. It has a portion of it B3, and the remaining is residential. They're wanting to put in what looks like a bank with a drive-through. So you'll access off of here, come into the property. You have a parking lot to the rear. You have your drive aisles right here in the middle, and then everything circles around and comes back out, and there's another parking area in the front to be able to leave the property. With requirements not met, it says to note structures built in areas of alluvial soils as determined by the USDA Web Soil Survey will have a foundation and footer detail. Delineate the center line of the blue line stream on the property. Provide updated dumpster and pad specifications. Check potential dumpster encroachment on Lot 8. Depict all existing easements. Dimension all driveways, walkways, and parking areas. Provide open space exhibit. Include open space requirements and site statistics. Orient vicinity map to match plan. Denote construction vehicle access. Addition of tree protection areas from previous plans. Addition of 25-foot floodplain setback from previous plans. Label area of access easement and add access easement maintenance note. And depict vehicle use screening of an average of 8 feet in width. A lot of those notes right there was to bring information from the previous plans. We always like to bring all our information forwards from our previous plans. Some of the information is not exactly attached to this lot, but we like everything coming forward so that the next time it comes in, it has all that information for future reference. Waivers necessary. A waiver of the zoning ordinance, 16-6, for the maximum of 60 feet of vehicle use area between the building and the street. Design considerations. See all ACELA comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Address sanitary sewer capacity. Address stormwater management. Plans, questions, or concerns. Discuss internal pedestrian walkways greater than 24 feet wide. Discuss perimeter landscaping requirements and timing of installation. Discuss place builder criteria. The vehicle use area they have along here, it's a zone-to-zone screening. They have it labeled 15 feet. They have 5 foot on the property and 10 foot on the adjacent property. So that is where the variance is being, well, that's not the variance. That's where the perimeter landscaping requirements and timing of installation. We want to know, are they going to put all that landscaping in at this time on the adjacent property? Or are they going to wait until the other property is developed? Then staff recommends approval with Urban County Council approves the zone change to B-3. Urban County Engineer, Traffic Engineering, Urban Forester, Open Space, Department of Environmental Quality, and then correct all note deficiencies listed as requirements not met. I'm going to ask if there's anybody who has any comments or questions or if they can be removed from the list of sign-offs. If not, applicant. Thank you, and good morning. I'm Tony Barrett with Barrett Partners here on behalf of Great House Property Village and Great House Acres, Anderson Communities, and Dick Murphy is here as well. But with regard to the clarify the timing, we would anticipate the use is for the U.K. Federal Credit Union. And they are involved with the application. Are they here? I don't think so. But the zone-to-zone buffer, we would anticipate installing that as part of the development of the credit union. So that would be concurrent with that. We're asking, I'm showing a raised crosswalk where it crosses the drive-thru lane. I think that whole drive-thru area would be raised. So ramp up and then, yeah. And then our variance is because we have, basically we have a smaller lot in the front that will serve primarily the customer, and then the drive-thru lanes, and then a rear parking area that would serve primarily the employees when they have regular visiting participants in their operations. So they would be inclined to park in the rear and allow the customer to basically come in, park, and leave if they're coming in. And then obviously the drive-thru would circle around and leave. But that's kind of the intent there. And then I think a lot of, I think some of these are, I appreciate carrying through and making sure the plan is consistent, but I think some of the requirements not met are off-site. I don't think I have alluvial soils on this site. Maybe I do, but I don't think so. And then the blue line stream on this site. Yeah, the dumpster, that's fine. I'm happy to answer any questions I don't think I have anymore. All right, thank you. Anybody else have anything? So staff recommends approval of PONMJDP2571, great house property, the Village of Great Acres, lot number not amended. Anybody with no changes? So moved. Second. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Okay. Under re-approval's continued discussion, we have PLN and MJDP2544, Interstate Park Development, IVCP, Athens South, LLC, tract 1M, Fairfield. This is located at 5354 and 5380 Athens-Winsboro Road. The purpose of this amendment is to depict the location of a proposed hotel on tract 1M and revise lot configurations for lots 1E through 1N. The applicant did submit a request for a continued discussion on November 17th. The new plan depicts the vehicular entrance of tract 1M relocated approximately 175 feet to the southeast. Based on that, submittal staff can offer the following revised requirements. So we do have Athens-Winsboro to the north. This is I-75 and then Competition Drive coming in off of Athens-Winsboro. Our subject property is located here. Oop, too far. So originally the entrance kind of lined up with this entrance across Competition Drive and they have moved it, like I said, approximately 175 feet to the southeast. And then I believe on this plan another change is that they've shown connection into the adjacent property there. Let's see, under requirements not met, group all general notes together in one list. Number two, flatten PDF attachment in a cella. Number three, depict interior landscape areas. Number four, provide dumpster enclosure and pad specifications. Number five, dimension the driveway that conforms to engineering standard drawings. Number six, provide bicycle parking and storage that comply with the zoning ordinance. Number seven, provide internal pedestrian walkways that comply with the zoning ordinance. There are no waivers at this time. Design considerations, as other development plans are certified, additional information will be required to be included on subsequent plans, and that's pretty standard for all plans like this. And under plan questions and concerns, number one, discuss height of canopy. It must be a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches. Number two, if property is subdivided, public sewers are needed. Number three, address sanitary sewer capacity and verify pump station has capacity. Number four, describe stormwater management proposal. And then under the conditions of approval, standard sign-offs, engineering, traffic engineering, landscaping, addressing, urban forester, Department of Environmental Quality, bike ped, open space, division of fire, division of waste management, division of water qualities approval, the capacity assurance program requirements, U.S. Postal Service, and then finally to correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met. With that, I'll open it up to you all for discussions or anybody needs to be removed. Under plan questions and concerns, you can remove item two about the public sewers at the top. This went through months ago. I didn't have you as built. Chris, you can remove open space. Good morning. My name is Stephanie Blaine with Palmer Engineering. We are here today to basically continue discussion on this plan that you all saw over the summer. As Chris mentioned, the main purpose of this is to shift the entrance down to the center of the site. We had previously tried to line that up with the existing entrance. What we found is that the pad in this area was built about five feet higher than originally anticipated. It wasn't something on the design side we were made aware of when it was constructing. And so once we got the as-built survey, a request of traffic was that we provide that future connection. And so once we got the as-built survey, we could not connect on both ends because of the grade change across the site from competition drive. So it was a matter of what we tried to, once we actually had all the sign-offs working right to submit the MILR and got the survey information back. And so that's why we're coming back to you today to try to shift that entrance down. I believe the new ZOTA added in some offset regulations in terms of entrance not aligning. And I believe we exceed those entrance requirements. So just wanted to see, I guess, if there was any questions. Let me, I don't know, see if I can go back. I guess I did have a couple follow-up. I think some of these were the same requirements not met that were on here before. So in terms of grouping the notes together, what is the intent? I guess we before had some on the left side of the sheet and some on the right side of the sheet. Is there something additional that we need to show? No. Okay. I believe we've worked on the landscape islands already, the dumpster enclosure with Scott. I think we've sent him all that information as well. So I think you've already signed off on that. Bicycle parking, I know, Scott, we worked with you on that. We moved that close to the building. Are we still, I don't. Yeah, I think these are just carryovers like you mentioned. Because I saw that too and I thought, well, I don't think we. Yeah, we didn't change that. The only thing we changed is we still just moved the crosswalk down and moved the sidewalk connection down. And that all meets what we said. So as we make a change, it's good for the divisions who the change doesn't impact at all. For instance, if Solid Waste says, hey, yeah, we can still get our truck in that main entrance and get around to the dumpster and back out, it opens up your sign-off again so you can double check. Because that entrance could change your sign-off. So if there's something like Environmental Services says, listen, that entrance change doesn't change our sign-off. We've already signed off. Take us off because we've already got it. We just need to know that. But if you want to verify that the sidewalk, with the entrance moving, the new sidewalk still meets the requirements, then you would remain a sign-off. That gives you another look. Yeah, absolutely. I just was verifying. I thought that was the case. I just wanted to verify that that didn't change anything while I had Scott in front of me. I did have one question. I think the access was shown on the back of this lot before the vehicular access, and then the sidewalk access is to the front, which, again, great that the sidewalk access is to the front. But I'm thinking about as that next development comes in, it might be easier if both of those connections were in the same spot. Just something to think about. We don't care, right? When I looked at that, I was like, well, that can lead to some really internal strangeness between the two sites, and if the actual vehicular connection is there, then it really makes more sense. So it might be a great thing. From our sense, we would prefer people to go in the front of the building, like the general public would be entering in the front of the building, and so that's why we were showing that on the front side. Oh, yeah, that's where we want that. I just meant, you know, if they're together, sometimes that's better. I would prefer the sidewalk connection up front, too, and the vehicular connection. But, again, we don't know the grades and things. We don't fully understand the site. That gave us the most flexibility on the grade to put that in the back because we still do have a considerable, not a grade change, and we still have to get up from competition drive to that higher pad. So those were the considerations that we had in it. And to try to leave some flexibility because competition drive is pretty steep as well, and so that other lot that's to the south of this, we don't have a concrete plan. Right, sure. And so trying to leave flexibility to place another entrance to that site directly in the future. Okay. And that was the concern is that if the grades are an issue, that little sidewalk stub might be difficult to get to. So that's why I was thinking just, you know, if there was a vehicular entrance there, I think it's probably been thought through. Ownership understands that when they build that, that there may have to be some modifications to that sidewalk connectivity in the future. Yeah, sure. Okay. I think you can remove me from sign-off then just to save them that step. And let's go ahead and remove post office since they've already signed off on your kiosk or mail delivery location. I guess just to make sure while I have you all in front of me, so basically we have added or went ahead and added both the Taco Bell and the retail center. I know there's comments on those still, but the Milers had been submitted thinking the intent was the Taco Bell would go first. It doesn't have either one or the other two. The retail center has the Taco Bell but not the hotel, and then this one will have all three. So that sort of was our intent in terms of, in case that wasn't clear. Stephanie, you've got a 24-foot wide entrance there. Yes. Typically we see confederate-young commercials. Okay. Was that intentional? I'll double-check that in terms of the turning movements just to make sure we can get by our truck. I like the 24-foot pedestrian, but you're aligning with the very high-intensity use area for your arrivals. Yes. And so I'm concerned about... Having more space to be able to... Especially if someone's turning left and someone's turning right. If you've got enough room for... Because inevitably people will go in on the exit at the front door, and you'll have cars aligned like this, and then this guy's trying to get in. That's a good point. Just make sure that that circulation pattern is going to work. And then Scott may weigh in on the trash trucks coming in. That's a good point. Tight configuration right there. Steve, because before we had it 24 feet, but it was down further, and it was straight in line. And so that's a really good point in terms of the 30-foot. So we'll definitely take a look at widening that. Because I came across this in another city. Yep. Okay. And those are... Are those entrance aprons? Those would be an actual apron. They're not flush, right, when you come in? In this one, yeah, because it's not an access road. It would be a traditional commercial entrance in this one. Because that satisfies that. When we have those long crossings, there's that traffic calming of the entrance apron that helps with the pedestrian crossing. Yep. So you know how we're thinking around those things. Any other comments? Stephanie Embree-Batey with FIRE. Yes, sir. Right where your dumpster enclosure comes around, it goes from 24 foot. What are you all saying on that? Oh, that needs to be 24. That needs to be shifted back. That was just a dimension from the end of the pad, not the end of the enclosure. The enclosure. So... Okay. Yeah, the dimension is incorrect. I didn't notice that until you just said that, but that is very confusing. All right. Thank you. Yeah, we would not want to go below 24. Any other questions, comments? All right. Thank you all. All right. Let's see. So the staff recommends approval of PLNM JDP 2544, Interstate Park Development, Track 1M, with the removal of note number two under plans, questions, or concerns, and the removal of number seven, bike and pedestrian planners sign off, number eight, open space planners sign off, and then number 12, United States Postal Service sign off. So moved. Second. All in favor? Any opposed? All right. We're moving down the agenda. We're going to go to FRP 2523, Highmount Subdivision Unit 1, Lot 2, amended. This is south of Candlelight Way. I believe this is Mount Tabor up here. We have a, which was a single lot. We had this a couple months ago. We looked at this. This was a single lot with a duplex on it, and they were wanting to subdivide it down through the middle on the common wall between the two units. With that, with the revised conditions, you can see the requirements not met. We're down to one, add maintenance note by engineering. Two, then it was design considerations. We have review all. The seller comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Plan questions or concerns. There are not two independent connections to the public sewer. An independent connection or a reciprocal maintenance agreement will be required. Staff recommends approval with engineering traffic. Landscape, addressing urban forester, environmental quality, bike and ped, open space. Planner, addition of utilities and streetlights. Documentation of Division of Water Quality for CAP. And then correct all note deficiency is listed as requirements not met. I'll ask if there's any other comments or questions, or if anyone can be removed from this at this time. Can remove CAP. You can remove environmental quality. Remove environmental quality. Cheryl, you can also remove open space. Remove open space. Thank you. And bike and ped. Bike and ped. Let's see, what is that? OK, so that's 6, 7, 8, and 10 off of there. OK, is there any other comments or questions? If not, applicant. Hi, I'm John Hill. There is a sewer lateral note on this plan, if I need to change the language or whatever. But it's just basically current owners and new owners would be responsible for joint and reciprocal maintenance of the sanitary sewer line. Hopefully that takes care of that, but if we need to work on the language, we can adjust it. Any other questions or comments? Thank you. Happy Thanksgiving. All right. All right, so staff recommends approval of PON FRP 2523, high mountain subdivision unit 1, lot 2. With the removal under staff recommendations and sign offs of note number 6, Department of Environmental Quality, number 7, Bike and Pedestrian Planner, number 8, Open Space Planner, and number 10, the Water Quality Cap Approval. So moved. Second. All in favor? Seeing none, opposed? All right. All right. One more. We're moving forwards now to MJDP 2542 Phelps property. This is located out off of Old Richmond Road. This is Aphids Way. We saw this not too long ago. This proposal is CC zone. They're going to put in a C store, a restaurant, some townhomes, and some apartments. There was some question at the time about Old Richmond Road here. This is due to the state project with the R cuts. At this current time, this is state property, so until that can be closed and if it should be allowed for it to be developed, redeveloped in this project, right now they need it to remove off. They had halfway into the right of way, so they needed to remove that out of the right of way. So with that, they redesigned it, pulled back some of their parking. They took one of their buildings out of here and created a parking area with a note saying that when the state right of way is resolved, they hope to come back with the building and be able to create additional parking along the other side of the drive aisle. They went in front of the planning commission and was approved for their waivers for their vehicle use screening along the front facing into Old Richmond Road. They submitted a revised plan. With that, we're down to what you see here is requirements not met. Depict all existing proposed easements. Provide open space exhibit depicting location and area calculations for usable open space that complies with the zoning ordinance. Clarify street cross section CC and EE in addition of cross section for private street. Depict internal walkways in compliance with the zoning ordinance. Provide 15-foot buffer between the adjacent EAR1 properties in compliance with the zoning ordinance. This is CC, which is a commercial property, and then across Old Richmond Road is EAR1, so it's a residential, so there's a zone-to-zone screening buffer required. Provide typical detail for the landscape berm. Indicate, I'm sorry, add, they have a note on here, it says state right of way note, so we want to addition of a note saying including the 15-foot buffer landscape berm. When this was originally brought in, they had proposed a landscape berm. They had a detail showing how they were going to have the berm with the trees to be planted along it. That has now been removed off of here, but if they acquire the Old Richmond Road right of way, we want to make sure that they install the berm that was originally agreed upon between them and the residential zone. Denote location of the construction access. Depict cross-section for future landscape berm on Old Richmond Road. That's the berm that we were talking about. They had their waiver. We want to make sure that they denote that waiver being approved. Design considerations. Review all the comments and design considerations provided by engineering. Submit the 50% design report to planning and engineering. It appears that there are line levels that may need to be turned off on Aphid's Way. There's extra lines. I'm not sure what they are. Plan questions and concerns. Provide street name, suggestion, or address for the address to the address office. Discuss connectivity between lots two and three, providing a secondary means of address. Clarify if the trail will connect to Jacobson Park entrance. Discuss how the property will sewer and sanitary sewer capacity. Discuss section EE where it's shown on the plan. Is the intersection in the middle of the four-way stop condition? Discuss the raised pedestal table. We have a table located. Is this going to be stopped because we have four entrances? How is this going to work? What is the cross-section of the 16-6 right away off of Athens-Boonesboro on the 16th right end from Aphid's? Have proposed entrances been approved by the KYTC? Discuss construction entrance shown on the west side of the property. And at one time shown the construction access over here, which was on the old Richmond Road, but it's not shown now. What are the specifications for the eight-foot path? Will the parcel be subdivided? Is the sanitary sewer tap available for each proposed lot? If subdivided, public sewers are needed. What is the proposal for the stormwater management? The plan shows encroachment into an existing stormwater management facility. Has there been an analysis to determine if the proposed reconfiguration will be adequate size volume for stormwater quantity and quality? And from the existing and proposed development. Discuss who will own and maintain the stormwater management areas. Discuss addition of do not enter sign for the access from Richmond Road. Discuss the zone-to-zone screening. The staff recommend approval with engineering, traffic, landscaping, addressing, urban forestry, environmental quality, bike and ped, open space, fire, waste management, division water quality, U.S. Postal Service, Kentucky Department of Transportation Cabinet. Correct all note deficiencies as requirements not met. And to note the date of the Planning Commission approval of the requested waivers. With that, I open it to the committee to see if there's any other comments or questions. Or if at this time, can anyone be removed from the sign-off list? Okay, no comments. Applicant? All right, we're partners here on behalf of Anderson Communities and the entity Anderson Acquisitions. All right, Dick Murphy again is here as well. I can't address, but thank you for reviewing the latest plan. But I think the requirements not met is pretty much up to date. I have added the construction access on the right there. I had one over here, but we've taken that off because that wouldn't be appropriate anymore at this point. And then I think I've got the buffer. I've got 15 feet somewhere in there, so I should be okay there. Maybe I didn't note it. Oh, yeah, actually it just says 11, so I'll have to address that. So, okay. And then we'll get the berm back on there. I have that on there. I took it off since it's, so if you all want to show it, that's fine. But it's going to be off my property, so it'll be kind of like a potential or however you want to. Yeah, okay, that'll clarify that. All right, that's fine. And then, Embree, I added your connection between two and three at that location. So that's an emergency use only entrance. We've done that on some other properties that you should be familiar with. So if there are specific questions I can address, otherwise. Tony, I've got a quick question for you, Tony. The dumpster enclosure up there to the, I guess that top left over there, is when the truck service is at, is he going to be able to, how is he going to get out of there? He would come in and pick up and then he'd back out into that drive aisle right there and then leave. Back out how far again? I'm sorry. That is, well, that's 20 and 24 and something, so 60, 50 feet. So, I mean, the truck can back past that where he came in at and make that ride out of there? Yeah. He would pull in, pick up, and then back into that drive aisle and then leave. Okay, all right. And it would be similar at the bottom also. He would back into that drive aisle and leave. Or he could just back out and, if he wanted to, back out farther and leave. Everybody's studying that now, aren't they? All right. Do you want to go down through some of these plans, questions, or concerns? Okay. Do you have one in particular or do you want me to go through all of them? Well, I think generally that's what we try to do is look at those as well, just so that we walk through them through this technical process. We'll get Rob a street name too. That was what I was just addressing with Embry. The trail is, I believe that connects to Jacobson Park. I think that's part of the highway project. Well, it shows your trail coming through and then it converts into something that looks less than a trail standard and goes down adjacent to what would be the new Aphids Way. Are you maintaining that width? We're doing this trail. Right. And then there's a crossing shown on the highway plan and then a crossing, and then that's a trail by the highway department. Okay. I don't know what the specifications are of that path by Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. Yeah. I think this was more about the cross section on – is that Aphids? Right here? Yes. What's the trail width there? Is that 8 feet? That's an 8-foot trail path. It's 8 foot all the way through your development? Yes. Okay. And, Tony, does the – on the western portion of the plan, does that trail just start there? No, it terminates there. It could be extended. That would be future – what do they call it? Excess right-of-way? Is it – where it ends there, is that a decent condition, or is it a – is there some grade issues? Is it going into a basin? Is there anything we need to be concerned about? Because what we don't want is a connection we can't make. I don't know, but my recollection is, is that triangle there is pretty flat. Not flat, but not – It's not a basin, or it's not a – yeah, okay. It's not like that hillside between us and Aphids. I'll take a look at it, but I'm sure it's – And we also have this connection here that could be potentially connected up with Denton or Ellerslie. And since we're discussing open space, Tony, I know you're aware of all the CC Zone requirements for open space. Right. Okay, great. I think we're good there, so I'll clarify that with you. Seward Vaughan, I think we've talked about that in the past. We have a number of options of going down Athens Boonesboro Road or coming up through the park. Mike and his engineer will resolve that. Discuss Section EE and where it's shown on the plan. What is EE? It was an internal drive-out. Oh, yeah, it's up here. I revised that, and I now show it as whatever it is there. Eighteen feet, six inches back-to-back, which is 17.6 where it's not curving gutter. Yeah, that was just some of these where I was matching up the cross-section with where you were showing it, and they weren't matching up. So that's what a lot of those were. Yes, a lot of these plans and questions I've addressed with the latest plan. I think you have maybe you have a section of the right end and then the other access, and one was 16'6", and the other one was 16 feet. I was like, why are they different? Details. I think I've cleared those up. If I haven't, we will. It's a four-way stop, and it's denoted on there now. Oh, I see the next one, yeah, 7, 16'6". And then, yeah, these entrances exist now on number eight. Construction entrance I talked about. Timing of closure, that's why this plan is here, because we're ahead of the closure. Eight-foot wide path, number 11, number 12. Is that all concrete? I was thinking it would be a combination of asphalt and or concrete. Do you know where that occurs? What's it required to be? It can be either. We generally, like in a side path condition or if it's adjacent to the back foot curb, you don't generally see asphalt. We see that more when they're stand-alone. I think probably along Athens Way it will be an asphalt path, and then where it's along the street will be concrete, and then I don't know what Dennis will want internally there. Do you have a preference? I don't. I would think from a maintenance perspective that concrete would be better, just for the longevity. They all have their issues. Right. There's benefits to both. Again, that's up to you. I think just if there are going to be differences, maybe just to know where they are. They will be subdivided. The lots will be subdivided, and each lot will have a sewer. We're working with Mike on the stormwater management and how he's addressing that. Same with 14. Same with 15. I don't know that we have a choice on who owns it, and that's defined by the manuals as to what we'll continue working with. This is commercial, so it probably should all be private. And then 16, David had a question about the do not enter, and I've added do not exit signs. And then zone-to-zone screening, we'll have to address that. Anybody have anything else? Staff recommends approval of PLN-MJDP 2542 Phelps property with no changes. So moved. Second. All in favor? Seeing none, opposed? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... the waves and the wind to the beaches in a world where we have never been and we'll climb up on the mountain y'all we'll let our voices ring with those who've never tried it they'll be the first to sing Oh my I see you on the other side if I make it and it might be a long hard ride but I'm gonna take it sometimes it seems that I don't have a prayer let the weather take me but I know that I want to go where the streets are gold cause you'll be there you don't bring nothing with you here and you can't take nothing back I ain't never seen a hearse with a luggage rack so I put my knees up praying to start my back from falling down I spent so much time flying high till I face first in the ground so if you're up there watching me would you talk to God and say tell him I might need a hand to see you both some day Oh my so I see you on the other side if I make it and it might be a long hard ride but I want to take it sometimes it seems that I don't have a prayer let the weather take me anyway but I know that I want to go where the streets are gold cause you'll be there cause you'll be there Oh my my cause you'll be there Oh my my you am I blue yes I'm blue it started the day I lost you nobody ever missed somebody like I do am I blue am I blue just this morning over coffee I sat there crying cause you're gone long gone I didn't know just how much I was gonna miss you till I spent my first night alone am I blue yes I'm blue how could I have been such a fool now look at all the misery I'm going through am I blue am I blue tried to call and say I'm sorry I couldn't get you on the line you'll never know just how much I'm wishing you would show up and say you changed your mind am I blue yes I'm blue it started the day I lost you nobody ever missed somebody like I do am I blue am I blue am I blue Hey you, you're a child in my head you haven't walked yet your first words have yet to be said but I swear you'll be blessed I know you're still just a dream your eyes might be green or the bluest that I've ever seen anyway you'll be blessed and you, you'll be blessed you'll have the best I promise you that I'll pick a star from the sky I'll pull your name from my hat I promise you that I promise you that I promise you that you'll be blessed I need you before I'm too old to have and to hold to walk with you and watch you grow and know that you're blessed and you, you'll be blessed you'll have the best I promise you that I'll pick a star from the sky I'll pull your name from my hat I promise you that I promise you that you, you'll be blessed you'll have the best I promise you that I'll pick a star from the sky I'll pull your name from my hat I promise you that I promise you that I promise you that you'll be blessed you'll be blessed you'll be blessed you'll be blessed you'll be blessed Slipping away Sitting on a pillow Waiting for night to fall Girl in a dream Sitting on a pillow This is the night To go to the celebrity bar Saddened lace Is a little bit heavy Couldn't find time to call Ready or not Gonna make it through this bitter cold This is the night Go to the celebrity bar Yes, I'm tonight Why are you lonely? Yes, I am lonely So why be lonely? Sitting alone Sitting on a pillow Waiting to climb the wall Maybe she'll mind The loud jingles She opened her eyes and She goes to the celebrity bar Dressed up tonight Why are you lonely? Yes, I am lonely You'll be alone So why be lonely? Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music Celebrate, celebrate Dance to the music It was a teenage wedding and old folks wished them well We could see the pa did truly love the mademoiselle And now the young monsieur and madame had rung the chapel bell Said, I'll be, said the old folks, it goes to show you never can tell They finished dropping apart with a two-room romance sale The coolerator was jammed with TV dinners and ginger ale And when Pierre found work, a little money coming worked out well Said, I'll be, said the old folks, it goes to show you never can tell They had a high-five, photo party, they let it blast 700-liter records, all blues, rock, rhythm and jazz But when the sun went down, the value went down as well Said, I'll be, said the old folks, it goes to show you never can tell They bought a souped-up ship, it was a chariot of 53 And drove it down to New Orleans to celebrate their anniversary It was there where Pierre was wedded to the lovely mademoiselle Said, I'll be, said the old folks, it goes to show you never can tell They had a teenage wedding and the old folks wished them well You could see that Pierre did truly love the mademoiselle And now the young monsieur and madame have run the chapel bell Said, I'll be, said the old folks, it goes to show you never can tell Never can tell Never can tell Come on, Eileen Come on, Eileen Oh, Johnny Ray Said he'd set up on the radio with a billion hearts in one note And lovers would sing along with them And the young monsieur and madame would say more than ever Come on, Eileen We can sing this like a ballad Come on, Eileen Oh, I swear, Eileen At this moment, you mean everything You can address my thoughts on the back of your dirty Ah, come on, Eileen Come on, Eileen These people round here Be glad I sunk his mocked dry face So he's headed to wonder where he lives But no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no We are far too young and clever To Ranu, Ratu, Ratu, Ratu, Ratu Come on, Eileen Oh, you'll have this tune forevermore Come on, Eileen Oh, I swear, Eileen Ah, come on, let's Take up everything Would you address Eileen, nothing less Ah, come on, let's Ah, come on, Eileen Would you address Eileen, nothing less Ah, come on, let's Ah, come on, Eileen Come on, Eileen To Luray Come on, Eileen To Luray And now you are grown And now you've had your own Eileen Come on, Eileen It's great that I'm real or I ain't Come on, Eileen To Luray To Luray To Luray To Luray To Luray To Luray To Luray Come on, Eileen Oh, I swear, Eileen At this moment You'll have everything Would you address more important Would you address Eileen, nothing less Ah, come on, Eileen Come on, Eileen Oh, I swear, Eileen At this moment You'll have everything Would you address more important Would you address Eileen, nothing less Come on, Eileen Come on, Eileen Come on, Eileen Come on, Eileen Come on, Eileen You and me We used to be together Every day together Always I really feel That I'm losing my best friend I can't believe this could be the end It looks as though You're letting go And if it's real Well, I don't want to know I don't think you know Just what this is So please stop explaining Don't tell me cause you're hurt Don't speak I know what you're thinking I don't need your reason Don't tell me cause you're hurt Our memories They can be inviting But some are altogether mighty Frightening Every time You and I With my head in my hands I sit and cry I don't think you know Just what this is So please stop explaining Don't tell me cause you're hurt No, no, no Don't speak I know what you're thinking And I don't need your reason Don't tell me cause you're hurt It's all ending I gotta stop pretending Who we are guitar solo You and me I can see us dying Awfully Don't speak I know just what you're saying So please stop explaining Don't tell me cause you're hurt No, no, no Don't speak I know what you're thinking And I don't need your reason Don't tell me cause you're hurt Don't tell me cause you're hurt I know what you're saying So please stop explaining Don't speak Don't speak Don't speak Oh I know what you're thinking And I don't need your reasons I know you're good I know you're good I know you're real good la la la la la la la la la la la la oh, oh hush me, hush me, darling hush me, hush me, darling hush me, hush me, don't tell the girls I'm going hush me, hush me, darling hush me, hush me, darling hush me, hush me, don't tell the girls I'm going Saya menghiburkan video d'Andai Harbis dalam magnesoma mengandungan mengandungan mengandungan mengandungan mengandungan mengandungan merituaskan merita beris Anda ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Explode! Go ahead and jump! Give it in! Jump! Go ahead and jump! Jump! Jump! Jump! Jump! ... ... ... ... ... Explode! ... ... ... In the daily rush of things If we stop to think, it seems We never have time alone Doing the things we have to do Not much time for me and you Before we know it, it will all be gone Let's take the long way around the world Sharing each other as we go Let's take the long way around the world And let's take it real slow I get hungry just to talk Take your hand and take a walk I never have you to myself enough The two of us are really one And when it's all said and done The only thing that really lasts is love Let's take the long way around the world Sharing each other as we go Let's take the long way around the world And let's take it real slow Let's take the long way around the world Sharing each other as we go Let's take the long way around the world And let's take it real slow Let's take the long way around the world If you see a faded sign at the side of the road That says 15 miles to the Love Shack Love Shack, yeah I'm heading down the Atlanta highway Looking for the love getaway Headed for the love, yeah I got me a car, it's as big as a well And we're heading on down to the Love Shack I got me a Chrysler and it's about 20 So hurry up and bring your jukebox money The Love Shack is a little place where We can get together Love Shack, baby The Love Shack, baby Love Shack, baby, Love Shack Love Shack, baby, Love Shack Love Shack, baby, Love Shack Love Shack, baby, Love Shack Signs there, stay away fools The clock rules at the Love Shack It's dead way back in the middle of a hill To the funky old shack and I gotta get back Glitter on the mattress Glitter on the highway Glitter on the front porch Glitter on the highway The Love Shack is a little place where We can get together Love Shack, baby Love Shack, baby Love Shack, that's where it's at Love Shack, that's where it's at Fuckin' and a-kissin', dancin' and a-lovin' Wearin' that's a-nothin' cause it's harder than nothin' The whole shack shimmies Yeah, the whole shack shimmies The whole shack shimmies When everybody's movin' around and around and around and around Everybody's movin', everybody's movin', baby Folks linin' up outside just to get down Everybody's movin', everybody's movin', baby Fuckin' Little Shack Fuckin' Little Shack Hop in my Chrysler, it's as big as a whale And it's about to set sail I got me a car, it seats about 40 So come on and bring your jukebox money The Love Shack is a little place where We can get together Love Shack, baby Love Shack, baby Love Shack Love Shack, baby Love Shack Love Shack, baby Love Shack Love Shack, baby Love Shack Bang, bang, bang on the door, baby Nothin' louder, baby Bang, bang, bang on the door, baby I can't hear you Bang, bang, bang on the door, baby Nothin' louder, sugar Bang, bang, bang on the door, baby I can't hear you Bang, bang, bang on the door, baby Bang, bang, bang on the door, baby Bang, bang, bang on the door, baby Bang, bang, bang on the door Bang, bang, bang on the door, baby Bang, bang, bang You're what? Ken Rose Rusty Love shack, baby, love shack Love shack, baby, love shack Love shack, baby, love shack Love shack, baby, love shack Silly girls just seem to find out early How to open doors with just a smile A rich old man, she won't have to worry She'll dress up all in lace and go in style Late at night, her big old house gets lonely I guess every form of refuge has its price And it breaks her heart to think her love is only Given to a man with hands as cold as ice So she tells him she must go out for the evening To comfort an old friend who's feeling down But he knows where she's going and she's leaving She's headed for the cheating side of town You can't hide your lying eyes And your smile is a thin disguise I thought by now you'd realize There'd be no way to hide your lying eyes On the other side of town, a boy is waiting With fiery eyes and dreams no one could steal She drives on through the night anticipating Cause he makes her feel the way she used to feel She rushes to his arms, they fall together She whispers it's only for a while She swears that soon she'll be coming back forever She goes away, he leaves him with a smile You can't hide your lying eyes And your smile is a thin disguise I thought by now you'd realize There ain't no way to hide your lying eyes She gets up and pours herself a strong one And stares out at the stars up in the sky Another night, it's gonna be a long one She draws a shade and hangs her head to cry She wonders how it ever got this crazy She thinks about a boy she knew in school Did she get tired or did she just get lazy She's so far gone she feels just like a fool My oh my, you sure know how to arrange things You set it up so well, so carefully Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things You're still the same old girl you used to be You can't hide your lying eyes And your smile is a thin disguise I thought by now you'd realize There ain't no way to hide your lying eyes There ain't no way to hide your lying eyes Honey, you can't hide your lying eyes There ain't no way to hide your lying eyes There ain't no way to hide your lying eyes Okay! Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame I know I don't get there often enough But God knows I sure try It's the magic kind of medicine You know, Dr. Perkins found Used to rule my world from a payphone Ships out on the sea But now times are up, hell, I've got too much stuff Can't explain the lack of me But there's this one particular harbor So far but yet so near Where I see the days as they fade away Finally disappear Then I think about the good times Down in the Caribbean sunshine In my younger days I was so bad Laughing about all the fun we ever had I seen enough to fill the world's pan Fix a different ocean each present Listen to the drummers in the night time Listen to the syncopated world go round Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame I know I don't get there often enough But God knows I sure try Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame Lakes below the mountains Flow into the sea Like oil supplies to the canvas Oh how they permeate But there's this one particular harbor Sheltered from the wind Where the children play on the shore each day And all seem to bring A most mysterious call from the harbor So far and yet so near Where I see the day when my hair is full of gray And finally disappear Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame Yara jai Natura Me aroha jai ame 作詞・作曲 丸山 康 編曲 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 動画 丸山 康 動画 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 いらした イラスト 丸山 康 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康 イラスト 丸山 康