Music Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right, good afternoon everybody. I'm going to call to order the confirmation hearing for June 4, 2026. We have three members of the Planning Commission that we will be considering for reappointment. And so we'll do it this way. We'll call out each member to come up. Tell us a little bit about yourself. Not just why you want to serve on Planning Commission, but obviously reflect on your service on Planning Commission and why you would like to be reappointed. At that time, my council colleagues and I will be able to ask you questions or make statements, and then we will go into closed session to make our decision and then come back out. So first up is Molly Davis. If you will join us at the podium, please. Good afternoon. Can you hear me all right? My name is Molly Davis, and I want to thank you for allowing me to serve for the past 18 months, filling the role that another Planning Commission member filled and then left. I'm now up for reappointment or appointment to my first term. and I think I spoke to all of you about 18 months ago, except for perhaps Councilmember Eblen, that I am from Lexington. I grew up here. I've lived here most of my life. I am a landscape architect. I retired from being the director of the Arboretum a few years ago. Since then, I've been enjoying retirement, except for the weekly planning commission meetings, which are quite often. There is not an official break from them, which kind of keeps us on our toes. We're always thinking about planning and planning issues. I would be really honored to serve another term. I have a lot of experience when I was a landscape architect working for various engineering firms in planning projects. but I have not ever been so exposed to zoning changes and kind of following the tenets of a comprehensive plan and finding how a project either complies or doesn't comply with our comprehensive plan. I would like to serve again also because I feel like I've kind of gotten into the hang of how things happen, what our kind of most pressing needs are, what planning commission members keep utmost in their minds, and I think it would, if you are willing to appoint me or vote for me to serve again, I would be happy to do so. And I would like to be, I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have about me. All right. Thank you, Ms. Davis. Council members, please log in for questions or discussion. Council member Morton. Thank you. And thank you for being here and being willing to serve again. I'll just ask the same questions I asked last time, and I tend to ask almost every confirmation here tied to planning, zoning, or boards of adjustments, anything. So first, could you just tell me, I'm a strong believer in community input, being one of the driving forces of decision making. Can you tell me your thoughts on community engagement, community input, and how that drives, how that helps drive your decision making? I, too, think that community engagement and input is important. I feel a lot of times when the applicant tells us about the community engagement that they have done, they might gloss over people who object to what's going to happen or might have different ideas about what should happen someplace. I will tell you that there have been many times when we have had hearings that there's been a case made by staff, then the applicant makes their presentation, and there have been members of the public who are not happy that they each have three minutes to speak. They feel like they should have a time when they also get 30 minutes to speak or whatever the time is that others receive. I think that might be something good to consider. Cool. Thank you. And then also can you speak about your philosophy and thoughts regarding preserving historic communities here in Lexington, specifically related to my district, historic African American communities, their history and their culture? Well I think if you look at my voting record for certain things that have involved the destruction of historic properties in particular or areas, I'm quite concerned about that. I don't think that our future needs are best served by always destroying the past. Last as a follow up, I know that specifically in my district a lot of the communities that But maybe neighborhoods in transition or vulnerable communities are not defined as historic. And meeting that definition of historic has a lot of challenges tied to it. It's almost some of them just really can't get to that threshold. How do you gauge that if it's not defined as historic? Well, I guess historic, there are many different ways to consider historic. There are things which by virtue of being designated a historic structure, They can be documented and counted in the National Historic Register. Those things can still be torn down. It doesn't come with any sort of thing that restricts it from being torn down. It seems that there's, I don't know how, but it seems that there should be an ability amongst all the community to determine which things have, are better served to be rehabilitated or renovated than simply to be obliterated. Thank you. Councilmember Lynch. Hello, and thank you for being willing to serve again. I just have a couple of questions. Yes, ma'am. I know these past 18 months, you've probably had to deal with some meetings where lots of neighbors were very passionate about some of the things that were on your agenda or docket. Could you sum up in some words about how your first 18 months felt for you? Sure. Doing this for the first time. Well, my first 18 months saw the, not just the passing of House Bill 443, but the implementation of it. And I think there was a lot of apprehension, at least on my part, at first because it felt like it was going to be something very new and something very different. But I think having metrics that you can either say this plan has met that metric or it has not is far easier to ascertain and to judge than to something that says should be, could be, at least could be. So in that sense, House Bill 443, the implementation of it went very smoothly, I think. We on the Planning Commission see far fewer things, which I think greatly speeds up the process for getting plans through. I will say I'm surprised how many times there are postponements over and over again from the developer side. I know that there was a lot of concern. I understand there was a lot of concern that it was the planning commission and staff who were slowing things down as far as development went. But from my perspective, we have at least almost half the docket each time is postponed yet another month and then maybe another month. So it makes you wonder what's the wisdom of having these projects in the planning stages if they are forever kicked down the road. Thank you, and my last question is, I'm not sure if you're aware, but Vice Mayor Wu and I have been doing a lot of intentional work around making our boards and commissions better. And so one of those things, a part of that work is making sure that they are accessible to the public, more accessible to the public. So why should we reseat you instead of opening this position up to somebody else from the community that would be interested in serving this? You know, I am happy with whatever decision you make. I know that I serve at the pleasure of the mayor and the council. And if you think someone can better serve the interests of the city because you represent those people, I think I'm absolutely fine with that. I think the one thing that I do bring that I've noticed is perhaps a little different is being someone who has worked with clients both at the federal level, city, town. these things are a bit more familiar to me than they are perhaps to someone who's never dealt with planning and zoning. I'm also from Lexington, so I have a great regard and want to make sure that it stays a great place. And I think I would serve the community well. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Sheehan. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Ms. Davis, thank you for your service already and your willingness to continue serving. I know our planning commission meetings are long and sometimes can be contentious. And it also, you know, it's a steep learning curve. You have a lot of technical aspects to the decisions you're making and the work that you're doing that you have to really jump into. So I appreciate that. My question is about you as a public figure. So I know you're not in an elected position. This is an appointed position, so you don't have some of the same, you know, maybe considerations that we do as elected officials. But you are in a decision-making body. And after a zone change hearing, one of the past ones, you had made some comments on social media about the particular hearing and your decision and the planning commission in general. And you may not have gotten feedback from the community about that, but we did from some residents. And so I wanted to know how you think about your presence in the public within your role as a planning commissioner and how that may or may not have changed considering that instance or others. Sure. And kudos to you for bringing that up because it is something if other people aren't aware of it, there was a post by the Bluegrass Trust about the potential zone change to allow the third development on Maxwell. And someone said, how could this happen? And I said, blame the Planning Commission. I should know I'm on the Planning Commission. And I was in the minority in terms of the vote, and I felt very passionate about that thing at that time. I realize now that was a mistake to say something like that on social media. And I am aware that the mayor's office received a concern that I was trying to affect a future vote about it, which was not the case. But Mr. Duncan and I spoke about it. And like you say, I'm not an elected official. I can say whatever I want, but I don't think it would serve either my fellow planning commission members or myself or anybody else to spout off on social media. So considering the amount of things that I see on Facebook and Instagram about the proliferation of student housing now and how the council and planning commission members are getting kickbacks, I have said nothing because I don't think it's appropriate and I have really learned my lesson, I guess would be the best way to say it. Yeah, well thank you for being willing to talk about it too. I do know, especially with social media, and you have a personal private life outside of your role as a planning commissioner, right? And you will have opinions about things. And so figuring out how we all balance that and figure out what the boundaries are that we are going to draw for ourselves is important in these roles, particularly when we, like you do serve in these quasi-judicial roles where there are laws to follow and you have to be careful about showing bias in particular ways or having pre-decided things. So I appreciate your frankness about what has changed and how you think about it now. So thank you for that. Yes, you're very welcome. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Eblen. Yes, Ms. Davis, I just wanted to thank you for your service and appreciate you being willing to serve again. I was interested to know, by having a lot of experience as a landscape architect, how do you think that has helped you be a good Planning Commission member? Because that's something we don't always have in that body. Certainly. Well, being a landscape architect, a lot of people assume that a landscape architect knows about just plants and trees. but what a landscape architect really does is kind of form and mold the land and make sure that the things that are being built have places for pedestrians, places for cars, places for walking, places for bicycling. It seems to me that my role as a landscape architect has really come to the most, to me, it has come to the forefront the most when there seems to be a habit of some developers of cutting down all existing trees before bringing their plan before planning commission. and therefore they don't have to make any accommodation for those trees because they've already removed them. And I find that a real loophole in our regulations. It also concerns me when developers clear-cut all of the trees as the way to make a project work and then say, well, we're going to plant 200 more small trees. Now, I just said the landscape architect doesn't just care about trees, but it seems like that has become what I care about the most at times on various plans. But I also think you can see from other votes that when there have been developments that don't kind of integrate the streetscape with the project and they're removed, I don't think that they are good plans. And you mentioned that issue, and also you mentioned kind of the public engagement. Are there any other kind of, based on your 18 months on this, any other kind of things that you think we could really improve our process by doing? Our planning process about getting projects coming through? Well, I will say, and I wasn't paid to say this, but our planning staff works very, very hard. They do a tremendous job of engaging with people at any level about any topic that they want to, and we typically have things brought to us that are very fully articulated and thought out about why they would recommend approval or disapproval. I don't think that I am experienced enough at this point to have other suggestions for offering improvements. I do think that the things I've mentioned before about the public feeling that they don't have a voice in hearings is one thing to take note of. I think another thing might be perhaps a bit more discussion about why things are being postponed so much. And is it because they brought things prematurely before the Planning Commission? Or what is the hang-up, I guess? That would be my question, my concern. Okay. All right. Thank you very much, and thank you for your service. Thank you. Council Member Beasley. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Ms. Davis, for serving and being willing to serve for us again. I do have two questions. You said that the Planning Commission, that you all never get a break. You meet once a week, and you never get a break. Do you feel like we're requiring you all to meet too often? No, I think, well, we do have Thanksgiving and Christmas off. And if there are five Thursdays, we have one Thursday off. I think given the needs of both planning and looking at subdivision development, what are called subdivision committee items and then planning items, we, I think, meet as often as we need to. There are some times when our agenda isn't as full as it could be, but I don't feel I'm qualified to suggest a change in the schedule. And do you have to miss often? I have had to miss two extended periods, one last year when I had a vacation planned, and I missed three weeks this year when I had another trip to see concentration camps in Europe. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Davis, for your service and your answers. And very similar to council, planning commission is very often a thankless job where you only hear from people when they're mad at you about your decisions. I wanted to talk a little bit about your approach to zone changes. How does having a room full of people, and generally speaking, it's a room full of people who are opposing the proposal or the development. How does having that room full of people and a line out the door speaking on a project influence or not influence your decision making? Well, I think I've been fortunate to only have maybe two or three times when we've had a full room and people out the door. And I think it's been really important to listen to all of them, though it can take a long time. I try to approach each thing that we review from a basis of, you know, tell me why it makes sense. Tell me what the criteria are and why this would be appropriate to do. It doesn't make me feel antsy or nervous, but I do like to know what people's concerns are. And if it simply is a case of I don't want this in my backyard, I can pretty easily not overlook it but not get stuck on that. When there are a lot of people who have concerns that seem more legitimate, more overall about, say, the entire neighborhood, then I think it draws me to think that something isn't a good idea to do. Thank you for that. And thinking about planning commission, too, in terms of zone changes, you all are a very vital and important gatekeeper of potential development in the city, especially infill development. How do you think about the balance between growth and preservation, given that we have a pretty sizable housing shortage and given that we have the constraints of the urban service area and sort of this either culture or just kind of climate of folks who, there are a lot of folks who oppose expansion, you know, by any means or any reason. And then we We also have folks who oppose different kinds of infill, right? So in my mind, we either grow out or we grow up. Those are only two options. So how do you, when you're considering zone changes, especially on developments that are creating more density, more housing choice, how do you kind of weigh those two elements? Sure. And I think, again, it has to be a case by case basis. For instance, I oppose the zone change that happened along Maxwell because there were two six to seven story buildings being constructed and there would have been a third. And without us knowing what the impacts of those other two developments were, I thought it was premature to approve a third. Now that did pass the planning commission, but council overruled it and it wasn't allowed to go forward. Unfortunately, that developer can still tear all those houses down and build something, just not at the height and density that they wanted. You are so right. But if we are going to not expand the urban service boundary, we have to go up and be more dense. But, and this is, I'm not sure if this is tangential or part of the answer, but I started writing down the statistics of the various housing developments near UK that have been built lately. And what they're going, how are they helping meet the housing shortage. And my concern about that at least is that there is an oft-quoted number of 22,000 to 22,500 housing units short. 14,000 are rental units, 8,000 are single-family homes. But it seems like the city is bearing the brunt of the impact of the student housing without the University of Kentucky being a faithful partner. I know they don't have to comply with the planning and zoning regulations of Lexington and Fayette County because they are a state entity. But it seems like there should at least be some conversation about are student enrollments going to stay this way? If those developments have to be converted to not UK students, will that work? How will it work? So I am concerned about that issue in particular. but I do share your concern and your opinion that if we are not going to further expand we need to go up and be more dense. Yeah thank you for those answers and I share your frustrations with UK when it comes to housing. If there are no more questions from my colleagues I'll entertain a motion to go into closed session. So moved. Second. Thank you all very much. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. All right we'll be right back. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. uh i will take a motion to come back into open session we have a motion and a second all those in favor please say aye all right we're back in session uh thank you miss davis for your willingness to serve and your service so far and i'm happy to tell you that you have been approved for reappointment to the planning commission oh thank you very much thank you congratulations appreciate it thank you all right we're going to move right along mr larry forrester come on up same deal i guess it's good afternoon everyone my name is larry forster i'm seeking reappointment for the planning commission i think this is my second term but i'm not for sure i got on when uh god God bless him, Joe Smith passed, when he went up to council, and I filled his position. So I'm here today to be reappointed, but I know you want to learn a little bit about me. I work for Fort Bank, a senior vice president here at Fort Bank, been in banking for 21 years. I'm originally from South Carolina near Beaufort, a little country area, so I don't have any Lexington ties per se. But I have, my kids are born here, have two boys, 13 and 11. And I'm really doing this for them. We talk about planning commission, about planning for the future. It's their future so that they can have something to come back to when they graduate, if they go off to college, if they stay here, not stay here for college, but they can come back to something they like. And that's been kind of my driving force. You'd be surprised those young guys can tell you a whole lot about their lives and what they want to do. So being in the planning commission allows me to do that with them. I share that with them. They get to watch all the stuff on TV and wonder why daddy's in meetings for 14 hours and not home. And then they said it was boring. So I have to agree at times. Yeah, yeah. But, you know, honestly, that's kind of my driving force. I don't have any personal thing about it. It's you doing the right thing for the right reasons. Me being in banking, it does allow me to see certain things that happens in the community. But it also allows me when we were doing deals to talk with those developers and things of that nature and also talk with the community. So it's new, it hasn't been new for a long time. I think recently we did the expansion and I was a part of that as the chair. So I didn't have hair then and I don't have it now, but that was a difficult task. But I think you did the right thing at the time and don't look back on it. Just keep moving forward and just trying to make it, we'll make it do what we have to. So thank you Mr. Forrester. Colleagues, please sign in if you have questions or for discussion. Councilmember Lynch. Thank you Mr. Forster for being willing to serve again. And I'm going to ask you the same question I asked Ms. Davis. The work that Vice Mayor Wu and I are doing to increase access to the city's boards and commissions is very important. The planning commission is one of the ones that many people would like to serve on. So why should we reappoint you rather than selecting another candidate from the community that maybe is interested and have never done this before? That's a good question. I try to look at things pragmatically. It's, you can go in with a personal vendetta, personal field, but every deal is different, just like on the loan side and the banking piece of it. I'm probably in one of the most highest regulated industries in the country in banking. So being in the planning commission, that actually helped me. Didn't know that coming on, because I was on the Board of Adjustments first. So just adding that perspective to it, more of a realistic approach to it. Sometimes I have to have my banking hat on, but I don't utilize that all the time to make a decision. I make a decision based on how we interpret the comprehensive plan. I can't say somebody can do it better or somebody can do it worse. I do have the experience. My colleagues voted me chair for one year when I wasn't supposed to be voted chair. Yeah. But it was, I mean, that's what it is. I mean, like I said, I don't sit here and look at this like this is a pedestal. This is something I know a lot of people want to be on, but you got to take a humble approach to the planning commission. We work for council, and that's the way I always took it. That's the way I was told, the way I understood it, the way I interpret everything. So with that being said, we know how to take orders, but we know how to lead too. Thank you so much. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Councilmember Sevigny. Thank you, Chair. I'm going to ask you a question. I was going to ask the previous one, but Council Member Lynch had asked it before. Give me an idea of what you think. I feel like each person on any board has a unique perspective. What do you feel like diversity-wise, what opinion are you bringing to the table that is probably really unique to you versus anyone else? And does the planning commission lean into you on that particular issue? Okay. I would say right now I feel like we've got a pretty decent planning commission. We have never had an argument amongst each other, even after it. So from an opinion standpoint, what I bring to the table, it's not like I mentioned, more of a pragmatic approach. I know where I grew up in the deep south, so my opinion is a little different. And then I went to college in Pikeville. So having that opinion is a little bit different, especially being an African American male. And everybody pretty much respects that. But I also respect their opinion as well, because we do have folks that are tied to the horse industry. We have folks tied to the development industry, and we have folks that are in the business community. So with me being in banking, we cover all those for me. So I can basically bring people together, help them see it, and then if they don't, that's fine. That's why we have one vote, there's one person. You get one vote. And then that's it. We don't talk about it afterwards, but I don't. move on and if this is on change we send it off to council and you make a decision and this decision is made and we kind of wash our hands with it and say okay or nay but that's that's kind of what i bring to the table is more of a realistic approach uh... when it comes to the council members of the that's all i have to turn thank you council member martin does have the uh... kind of similar questions as earlier so can you just speak about your philosophy and thoughts regarding preserving historic communities here in Lexington, specifically historic African American communities, their history and culture. Yes, I don't like to talk about past applications, but since I've been here, I guess it's been 20 years now, I've seen some of the gentrification that's happened downtown off Limestone, been a part of that as well. So you got to be sensitive to those areas, but not just those areas. There's Prawl Town, there's Jimtown. Those are the things that I've learned about, and Brighttown. So when you're taking that approach, some people may not understand that, and I get it. As I mentioned, coming from the deep south, I understand that for sure. But we have to look at it and what makes sense. How can the neighbors get what they need? Are they getting what they need? There's certain things that we can and can't do as well. So we have to educate them on that, on the front end, instead of trying to wait until they get in here. Because sometimes when they get in here, they may not have legal representation to support them. And that's when we have to step up and say, hey, maybe let's pause, let's continue this to allow you to get some more information. But planning staff has been very helpful when it comes to that. But if there's any issues with that, we try to jump in and assist with that. So. Then, as I stated earlier, I'm a strong believer in community input being one of the driving forces to decision making. Can you tell me your thoughts on, and philosophies on community engagement and community input and how that reflects on your decision making? Yeah, you got to have community input because I think as my past, Ms. Molly mentioned, Ms. Davis, some folks want it near their house, some folks don't want it near their house. But you got to hear it. I remember there was an application that came up that we, I think, thought that it would be a go. It was a green light. But when the community came in and you got to hear and see what was going on, there were some things that we were not informed of. And I think that changed up the dynamics and changed up the approval process of that application. So again, we're here as public, somewhat public service. We're here because of you. You asked us to sit on this podium when you're not there to make decisions. So it's our right to make sure that the public hears and they have a voice. Because if they don't have a voice, then it's going to come back to you in a very, very negative way. I'm aware of that. So we wish we had different, I guess, philosophies to do things. But I know the House Bill 443 has made some changes. We're still trying to get ahead of that. But with that being said, I think getting educated on the front end, and I know planning staff has done that as best of their ability. But if you know you're going into certain areas that doesn't have that representation, there may be some ways that you can get out there and get boots on the ground. Now I'm not saying I have a solution for it, but there is some things that may have to happen when you go into certain areas that may be disadvantaged, to serve communities because they may not have the same resources that we have. So they need people to come to them and say, hey, this is going on in your community. Here's your options. Instead of this is what's going on in your community, come to the meeting and they're not sure what to say or how they need to say it or how they need to interpret it. So a lot of times it's educating them on the front end. Because if you do that, they may find, they may have a solution with the developer that, hey, I might take this particular opportunity or this particular opportunity. So it's a process like anything else, but you have to implement it. We can talk about it all day long, but if you're not implementing it, then it's a waste of time. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Sheehan. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Forrester, for your service and for being willing to continue. You know, one, we talk a lot about zone changes and those kinds of things in your role in the Planning Commission for that. But I'm interested in the policy making piece and how you think about the policy making. Because you work on ZODAs, zoning ordinance and text amendments, you work on the comp plan. And I would like to know, particularly for our comprehensive plan, I think of that as the guiding principles that we have for our long-range planning and that then that leads to policy and regulation. Are there particular pieces of our comp plan that you advocated for that you want us to look at on ongoing policy or pieces that you're working on setting policy for now based on our comp plan that are very important to you? I have not recommended anything at this point. I know things that we are discussing or haven't discussed or in the process of it. I probably was advised not to talk about those things. Just to be honest, this was one of my first planning commission 101. Never discuss things that's being discussed in planning commission until you actually have it done. So the way I understand the comprehensive plan is this. Everybody's going to have a certain interpretation of it. And we all know each one of you have your own interpretation of what the comprehensive plan means and don't mean. What we have to do is put it together and make it make sense. And I guess that's why we have the commission set with the 11 votes that we have. So I don't get, some folks get caught up in it. I don't get caught up in that. I want to get caught up in the process and how to implement it and is it making sense. And if it's a zone change, it can make sense to us. As you know, you may say it doesn't make sense to you. Or it cannot make sense to us, and as you know, it may make sense to you. So that's what we do, and that's what I do. We make our decisions there while we are there, and then we leave it up to council to make the final decision. Now if it's time for us to step up, we step up too and do that. But the process is, you have to have a process, then you have to implement the process. Right now, I think there's just a lot of irons in the fire that are going on and the things that are going on in Frankford that are affecting Lexington too. Because I know we got a microscope on us right now. So that's also highly important, because I really don't want Frankford directing Lexington. Yeah, and I understand why you aren't, you are advised not to talk about zone change processes beforehand as you're reading documents or things like that. But some of our policy work is very public, so you have public work sessions and things where you're working on ordinances in a public place. So I don't think it's inappropriate to speak about those things, but thank you. I understand. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Forster, for your answers. I hate to start off my questions this way by disagreeing with you, but had said that your perception was that the planning commission worked for the council and i believe that the planning commission is a independent entity that works for the people and is part of the our system of checks and balances because if you did work for the council we wouldn't have so many disagreements that we've had historically and we've obviously also worked really well together as well can you speak to a little bit of your experience as chair and how that's informed the way you think about processes and the way you think about the commission? Yeah, I think when I started, got in that position, it was around COVID or shortly after COVID. It definitely was a different perspective. I had to take that leadership role, so it allowed me to learn my members better. I was able to talk with them, also get more with staff, a meeting with staff a little more directly than we would just on Thursdays coming to meetings. Because we would have meetings before the meetings just to learn, hey, what's going on with the agenda? Anything's happening? Things of that nature. So that did bring a lot of perspective to it. And that actually what I liked about it was, okay, this is why we are doing XYZ. So, actually I grew from it. Because sitting in the position and you're just coming on Thursdays or doing your meetings, You learn a lot, but you're not getting into the weeds of it. So it just allows you to basically to listen more. For me, it listened more and then being able to articulate that out. And then when you hear having your public meetings, help educating the staff, excuse me, the public, and then making sure the meetings are ran accordingly. Yeah, and as somebody who also chairs a lot of things, including zone change hearings, you know things get contentious, things get loud, things get really confusing and technical. So I've really appreciated you in your role as chair, honestly, just keeping things together, keeping things flowing so that it's a good process. I wanted to ask you about thinking about zone changes, thinking about some of our recent past zone changes, thinking about some of the ones that might be coming up to us soon, looking at Woodland and High, Kentucky and Maine, any others. there seems to be a general sense if you're looking at folks who oppose developments or come out and speak against it there's there seems to be a lot of antipathy or opposition to density I feel like a lot of the the arguments that you hear from groups or organizations or neighborhoods is this is too tall right if only it were this height instead of this height thinking Thinking about how much infill pressure we have in the city with our housing crisis, with the urban service area, how do we reconcile that and what's your thinking when it comes to a proposal that is building more density, that is using our land in a more efficient way versus the pushback that you get from neighbors in terms of neighborhood character or this doesn't belong or it's going to create more traffic, all those kind of things. How do you think through that idea? You know, there's, and that's hard, right? Because you still have the same individuals that don't want the density, they also don't want the expansion. I mean, I think that's kind of, it speaks for itself. How are you going to do both? And then what you want, you don't want one, but you don't want the other. So it's hard to tell someone you can't go a certain height when they're at the height restriction. Because you wanted less of a height. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but then it's also the same folks are telling us, well we don't want you to go further out because we don't want the expansion, we don't want to utilize the land. We understand that too, but we do have things in place to preserve the land, which is PDR. I was very educated on that during these years on the planning commission and things. So I think that's one way to do it. But Vice Mayor, that's a really hard thing to do. I'm not going to sit here, there's not a drop dead answer I can give you. You just got to look at every deal case by case and say, does this make sense here? If it does, you go with it and you live by it and live by your decision. If you, that's about all you can do. There's not a lot of comments you're going to hear from me to speak on that because I don't do that. It's just, it's tough, especially in the areas that you were focusing on. UK, from the banking perspective, we always call UK the big gorilla. That's since I've been in Lexington. They are the big gorilla in the room, but if they're not in the room, it's hard to really talk about the gorilla. Yeah. I would prefer them to be in the room so that maybe a smaller setting so you can understand what they're doing. That way maybe we can plan accordingly around that. I think a lot of reasons that we're having the issues we're having because we don't know what their plans truly are. But that's kind of out of my purview, so we can only address what we have in front of us. And that's, if it's an apartment complex, it's not actually on their land, so it's really not UK. So I don't focus on UK. It may be the driving force, but if it's not their land, then it's not UK. It's private development. Yeah, thank you for that. If there are no more questions, I'll entertain a motion to go into closed session. Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. We're in closed session. We'll be right back, Mr. Forster. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Mr. Forster, if you want to join us back at the podium. I will now enter a motion to come back into session, open session. So moved. Second. Motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All right, we're back in open session. Mr. Forster, thank you for your service. Thank you for your willingness to continue serving. We're happy to inform you that we have approved your reappointment to the Planning Commission. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. And y'all have a good weekend. It's not the weekend for us yet. We're getting there. All right, Mr. Bruce Nickel, come join us at the podium, please. I think you know the drill by now. Welcome. Yes, hi. How are you all? My name is Bruce Nickel. I am a local Lexingtonian. I've grown up in the building material business and then in the development business, construction business, and now in developing AI systems. So that's my background and kind of the perspective I'm able to bring to the Planning Commission. I've served two terms here on the Planning Commission. I was originally appointed by Mayor Gray. And during that time, I was a part of two different comprehensive plans. Right when I got here in 18 was a really contentious conference of plans. So it was baptism by fire. It was very interesting to be a part of that. Was able to participate with more experience in the most recent conference of plan. So I have a good understanding of how that's put together and how we can think about how we'd like to grow our city and improve our city and plan to do so. SO I'M HERE SEEKING REAPPOINTMENT FOR A THIRD AND FINAL TERM AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONING MEMBER. ALONG THE WAY I'VE BEEN A PART OF MANY OR A COUPLE OF SMALL AREA PLANS. FOR A TERM I WAS THE CHAIR OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE. AND PROBABLY TWO OF MY, TWO MOMENTS THAT I'M PROBABLY MOST PROUD OF THAT I WAS ABLE TO BE A PART OF AND HELP INFLUENCE was a ZODA that removed the parking requirements for multifamily housing. For a long period of time, parking requirements reduced the amount of housing units we were able to build on property. So that was a real sticking point, and the momentum moved in the favor to reduce the parking requirements, and I'm thankful that I was able to be a part of that. The second was we recently had a zone where we removed some of the parking requirements for B1. Because we're in a situation as we are trying to improve our city, solve affordable housing problems, and try not to disturb our prized land. That we've got infill property that may be B1, that may seek a different use. and by reducing their parking requirements, it's freed up that space for future development. So those are a couple of things I'm very, I was pleased to be a part of. And some things that I've seen, one thing that I'd like to bring up that when House Bill 443 was passed, I think that that's put us as planning commissioners in a better position to make decisions that are objective, strictly objective, based on facts, evidence, those things that can be measured and verified, rather than subjective, which has to do with personal feelings, experiences, and opinions. So what I'm working to do now is to make sure that we are respecting the property rights of the landowner and also respecting the property rights of all the properties that are affected by the development that we're seeing under consideration. So weighing those two things are where all the contention, that's what we see here. And when I'm in that situation, what I try to do is to understand that my job is to listen to the evidence from both sides and then discern what factors are important in meeting the goals of the comprehensive plan and also in the zoning ordinance as well. So it's definitely something that we battle on a daily basis. And I think it's important for all the stakeholders to be involved, but it's also important for all the stakeholders to be informed, to understand that we're talking about property, property rights, and the community that is being affected. Because there's both sides of the property rights. So the property rights of the developer and the property rights of the adjacent homes. And so that was the genesis of planning commissions and zoning ordinances. So that's something that we are going to be, that's just part of the game. That's part of the job. And so if I'm able to understand the arguments and rely on my staff's interpretation of the comprehensive plan, I'm free to make a decision that I believe is within the bounds of the conference plan and the zoning ordinance. So there's a little bit about me, and I appreciate you all considering me for a third term. All right, thank you, Mr. Nickel. Colleagues, sign in if you have questions and discussion. Council Member Reynolds. Thank you, Vice Mayor. And thank you so much, Mr. Penn, for all of your work. I'm sorry, what? Nickel. Nickel. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. That's fine. I understand. You can't see my name. I'm sorry. I really appreciate what you've done up until this point in your time, and I apologize. I misspoke. What do you think? I really liked what you just said and your thought reasoning. What do you think that is your role personally on the commission? Do you feel like your background helps you make your decisions? And if so, why? And what do you offer that maybe somebody else would not offer? That's a good question. I would say personal experience in the building world and the development world brings a unique perspective amongst 11 of us that are on the commission now. Now, normally, or in previous times, we've had a better representation of individuals who have had experience in real estate and development. Right now, we have a lot of realtors, which is very important because they have an understanding of the market itself. I do believe that we are underserved in our representation of the building community. And I think I have the ability to bring that perspective. But I think also where one of my passions is and where I really think that I can add value is understanding the complex issue of affordable housing and affordable housing financing and understanding how difficult a task that is. So when I see people come up and have affordable housing projects, I try my best to support them because I understand the difficulty of the task they're trying to achieve. So those are two perspectives. The other would be just experience, where when I first came on board, it took me a couple of years to learn the process. and since that point I've really put myself in a position to not make not come into any meetings with any type of preconceived ideas and listen to what each side all the stakeholders have to say and try to discern the facts that I can then act on and most importantly take my emotions out of it take the subjective side out of it and focus on the objective. Those were very thorough answers, and I really appreciate that. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Mm-hmm. Thank you. Council Member Lynch. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you for being willing to serve again. I just have a couple of questions. The question on your application regarding why are you interested in serving, you gave a one-sentence answer, so I'd like to give you time to expound upon that a little bit more, because I would love to know why, at a granular level, you would like to serve again. Absolutely. Thank you. Okay, good. What I'm interested in doing right now is I think we're, as Mr. Wu was saying, we're in a really difficult time right now. We've just added 2,800 acres to our urban service area that allows us to develop. So we are now looking at land that we have the ability to develop in the most efficient way that serves the most needs for our community. but we're also faced with the fact that that land's not going to be developed for at least three to five years. So in the interim, we need to be smarter and stronger about infill development and how we can do that in such a way that brings up everyone in the community, most importantly doesn't displace anyone in the community. and that tension between growing out and growing in is something that I'm interested in. I think I can add value in that area. I'm also very interested in small area plans. I recently was a part of the Blue Sky small area plan, and that's a real unique time where you can actually help shape a vision for the community. That's something that I've really enjoyed in the past, and I'm interested in doing again. But we are also, even though I was the representative from the Planning Commission on the Blue Sky, all the commissioners have the ability to have input in small area plans. So small area plans are very interesting to me. The next piece would be I am a proponent for House Bill 443, and I think that I can help our committee make decisions that are objective rather than subjective, So I think I can add some value there. So that's the reason I'm interested in continuing my service. Awesome. Awesome. Thank you for answering that question. Then my last question is, similar to what I've asked the other two applicants, is that Vice Mayor Wu and I are taking a lot of intentional time and work to make sure that our boards and commissions are more accessible to the public, and they are truly representative of our neighbors here in Lexington. And in our research, what we saw is there's been a lot of recycling of the same folks on the same boards and commissions, which has not lent itself to being accessible and truly attainable for people that are interested in serving. So why should we reappoint you, thinking about you've been on the Planning Commission for several years? That's a good question. I'm here to offer my services again for a third term. and if I believe that I've added value and if you all believe that I can continue to add value, I think that I would be the good candidate to continue to do that. If we would like to make a change and give other people the opportunity, I would only recommend that if I'm not re-approved that you consider approving someone that has experience in the development world, development community. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Morton. Thank you. And similar to the past question I've asked, can you just tell me your thoughts and or philosophies on gentrification and how that affects your decision making process when- Gentrification? Yeah, gentrification. Absolutely. When I'm thinking about that concept, I don't use the language of gentrification. The one actionable item that I'm most concerned with is displacement. Displacement is something that I'm very concerned with. I'm not interested in developments that then displace or disrupt communities. I think that our neighborhoods should be protected. All neighborhoods should be protected. We are going to continue to see pressure. As we have pressure where we have a housing need and we have a development needs, we need more jobs, we need more housing. We don't have any more land that's available right now because our 2,800 acres is not going to be developed for a few more years. So we're going to have to make some difficult decisions that affect communities and neighbors. I think it's important for us to educate different communities on what the zoning is in the community that they have and what the comprehensive plan says that the future growth is in those communities. I think that would really help the community understand that change is coming. No one likes change, but it's something that we can, if we take the perspectives of all the stakeholders, I think we can do it in a way that promotes the overall vitality and growth of our community. Because I feel like we're at a position right now where it's do we want to grow as a community or do we want to stay the same? And I'm a proponent for Lexington to continue to grow, to continue to thrive, and to bring more jobs and more housing opportunities for everyone. But on the displacement, which I'm very concerned about, we need to make sure we are not displacing human beings. That is a negative consequence of gentrification. If gentrification happens properly, it's supposed to bring the whole community up, not displace the community. So these are challenges that we face, and for me, it's on a case-by-case basis. I've been in a situation before where a property is to be developed, and half the net was a property that I was developing. I was interested in doing affordable housing units, 80 affordable housing units, and I went to a community meeting, and we ended up with half the community saying we need affordable housing and half the community saying, no, we want luxury apartments. So we're always going to be fighting this battle, but I think it's most important to be inclusive in the decision-making process with the stakeholders, but also focus on improving the community overall. And I think it's important not to leave communities behind. And I think we can do that with decisions made by the Planning Commission as a whole. Okay. So then, kind of in that same tune, when it comes to preserving historic communities, specifically historic African American communities, what's your philosophies on that? I know that displacement is definitely a huge component of gentrification, but also changing that culture, changing that history. Can you speak towards that? I think there needs to be a mechanism put in place where if communities, historic communities, decide that they would like to preserve their distinct culture and community, I think there's not a way now, but I believe that there should be a way to voice basically a small area plan for those communities rather than just having an option of putting a historic overlay over those communities. Because my belief is when a community makes a decision that we're going to be a historic neighborhood, they forego a lot of their rights that they are allowed for their property. So I would be interested, I would love for someone to figure out how you can protect the culture of these distinct neighborhoods in a way that doesn't restrict the property rights of that community. I haven't seen a proposal for that, but I would love to see if there's a way that we could preserve the cultural aspect, not just the historic structures themselves. because I think if you're going just to protect the historic structures, you can limit the potential growth opportunities for the community. But if you could focus on how do we preserve cultural aspects, I think that would be something wonderful for you all to take up. I'm running out of time. I'll sign back in. Thank you. Council Member Sheehan. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Nickel, especially because you're a 5th District resident. I appreciate your service and your willingness to serve again. My question for you is around the appointment process. There is a point in the process where the Planning Commission might actually appoint the next Planning Commissioner. And that actually occurred in the recent past. And at that time, there was discussion about the development of a process for the Planning Commission when that happens. And so I wanted to hear from you, especially because you have such a long tenure on our Planning Commission, if you all have worked on that process and what you think should be involved in the process of that appointment if it comes to the Planning Commission. Okay. We ended up in that situation. It almost was an anomaly where the appointment from the mayor was not made. I'm thinking, I'm going through my brain to make sure I'm remembering that correctly. But I think my understanding was that the appointment was not made by the mayor. And then... What happened was... Yeah, please refresh my memory. When we are at a confirmation hearing like this, if we deny the confirmation, then it can go to the Planning Commission. If it's outside, there's a time window where someone has to be confirmed. And if we don't confirm someone in that time window, and law corrects me if I'm getting this wrong, but if we don't confirm someone in that time window, then it does go to the Planning Commission to fill that vacancy or that appointment. Okay, in my memory, I do know that we made a big effort, and it felt like an extraordinary effort, to include as many people as we possibly could in that process. And we had great response from the public, which I thought was really unique, because the public got to propose their own, they had the opportunity to apply rather than being recommended by the mayor. and we saw an incredible amount of wonderful candidates. And we spent a lot of time deliberating on it, and we made a decision. And that's when our appointment was made. But it was a unique process, and I was overwhelmed by the experience of some of the applicants and what they could bring to the table. And I believe we ended up with an excellent candidate to fill that spot. but it was a nice part of the experience to see the quality of people that were interested in that position. And that goes to Mrs. Lynch's comment. We do have a lot of talent here in Lexington. It was really nice to see it bubble up to the surface when it was allowed to be just submitted to Mr. Duncan. Yeah, and just for the process piece, that is something that I think still, it sounds like it might still need to be discussed. And so if that were to occur again, and you are serving on the planning commission, I would like maybe you to start that conversation of what would that process look like so that it isn't something that has to be created at the time that you have a policy in place for what that looks like should an appointment come to you all. Okay, thank you very much. you thank you vice mayor thank you council member martin thank you so we know there's a lot of uh i mean several stakeholders when it comes to um you know this process you got developers you have preservationists and we got different things and depending um you know i guess what communities depends on the amount of possible opportunity time they have to come down and interact depends on you know i guess the community engagement all the different things and you know most of the time Our developers tend to have lawyers or stakeholders that can advocate on their behalf if they see so fit. Our preservation of community, our horse farms tend to have a large amount of folks that can come down and advocate. But in some of our communities, just that community engagement piece and community voices, sometimes their voices, and what they would say, tend to be not heard. Can you just tell me your thoughts on community engagement, community input when it comes to decision making, and knowing that for specific existing communities um they might not have you know all the resources or tools to come down here and advocate and get the decision that they want or that they feel is best um is how you how you go about approaching that you're making a really good point i think that uh we were maybe i proposed this idea many years ago but i think it's important for communities to understand the zoning ordinance and how it affects their community and i think it's important to know what the zoning regulations are in the community, understanding by a parcel basis. But then if we could somehow map on the comprehensive plan so people can start to understand what the vision is for that community. Now the public does have the ability to have public input on the comprehensive plan, but I think once the comprehensive plan is completed, we need to continue to educate each community on what the future holds based upon the comprehensive plan for that community. And we see a lot of things that come up over and over and over again, such as I live at the end of this hammerhead street and I really enjoyed looking at this, I bought my house because I enjoyed looking at this vacant parcel of property and that's why I bought my house. So educating people on the fact that this hammerhead is there for a reason. The property adjacent is slated for future development. So I think that that's important. Another thing that I think we've done a very good job with over the past eight years is is to tone down the language on neighborhoods who are anti-multi-family development in their community. There was a lot of bias and antagonistic thoughts, I guess, or misunderstanding about those that rent rather than own. And I think our group has done a good job letting the community know that we are not discriminating between people that own their houses and rent their houses. So that's something that I think we've made a good effort on the planning commission to communicate. So we have those that, so to answer your question better, I think we need to educate the communities on the zoning ordinance, how it affects their community, any small area plan that's associated with their community and also the comprehensive plan and the possibility for future growth. I mean, putting maps on in public places I think would be valuable. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Nickel, for all your answers and your service. I think your colleagues and other folks have also talked about your role, especially when it comes to zone changes, as you want to look at things case by case, right? Every situation is different, every neighborhood, every development. But I wonder sometimes, like, as a planning commissioner, do you feel any obligation to also think about the big picture? And you've spoken to that a little bit, thinking about where we are as a city, What kind of shortage do we have? What are the limitations we have growing up versus growing out? All those things are kind of big picture things, right? So how do you balance adjudicating cases case by case, but also I'd have to assume everybody on the commission, everybody up here has a big picture sort of vision or set of values that they would maybe like to see the city move in. So how do those two things sort of fight for space in your brain, so to speak? It's something we think about on a, I want to, I guess, attach it to the comprehensive plan itself. So when we are putting new comprehensive plans together, that gives me the ability to voice my ideas on how we should grow. Because I am pro-growth, but in a responsible way. What does that mean? We've just added 2,800 acres. Let's find a way to use that in the most beneficial way for our community. So, the comprehensive plan is where I put my focus on my vision for the future. When we're dealing with specific sites, I look at the comprehensive plan. Well, that's an argument that's made by the applicant. They say, we've met the comprehensive plan by this. And then we get into the zoning ordinance itself, and these are the, by right, what you are allowed to build on that parcel per the zoning ordinance. And when we are in that situation, I am inclined to allow all the rights that the property owner would have in that zone. So I'm for protection of property rights and I'm against additional conditional zoning requirements that are sometimes added ad hoc at the end of our meetings that could be perceived as being added to appease everyone in the room. I'm more interested in protecting property rights and the property rights of the landowner and the property rights of the community. I appreciate that and I think you spoke to it too when you were talking about 443 of being able to make better decisions objectively versus subjectively. So thinking about the big picture again, you had mentioned that some of your proudest achievements was helping remove some of our parking requirements which made uh... things a little bit easier what else is either on your radar or things that you've been thinking about potentially for the future if we reappoint you've got another four years to think about other potentials other potential ways to kind of move that responsible growth forward are there any things like that that you're thinking about right now i've always had an interest in our vacant and underutilized property map And I would be interested in trying to find a way to somehow work with that land in a way that encourages future development. Because that looks like a big opportunity to me, our vacant and underutilized property. So I don't know if you all wanted us to look into that. There could be a possibility for concessions made or an advocate to help developers to develop vacant and underutilized property. I think there's something we can do with vacant and underutilized property. I think it's also important for us to look at city-owned property, the efficiency of the use of the city-owned property, and there could be some continued trade-outs that help benefit our community. So because we're not, I'm not interested, we've already had the battle about expansion. That is off the table, not interested in that at all. We've solved that problem. But we're still constrained because that land's not going to come online for three to five years. So how do we provide housing now? How do we provide jobs now? So we're going to have to get creative to get an understanding of what are some opportunities we can, I would rely on staff. They've got, they're brilliant. get them to figure out how can we put together a program to fast track vacant and underutilized property how can we provide a carrot rather than a stick to start looking into that land and i think would also be important for our city to do a do a study on the land that they own and put together a group to determine how to best use that land yeah i appreciate that and certainly i don't think you need permission from us to explore any potential you know solutions out there to crack our growth problem if there are no more questions i'll entertain a motion to go into closed session we have a motion and a second all those in favor please say aye all right thank you We'll be right back. ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. All right, Mr. Nickel, if you'll join us back at the podium, please. I will entertain a motion to come back into open session. Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All right, we're back in open session. Thank you Mr. Nickel for your continued service and your willingness to serve another term. I'm happy to inform you that we have approved your reappointment to the Planning Commission, so congratulations. Thank you, this will be the last one. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. With that, we are adjourned.