Good morning, everybody. We are getting ready to get going with our technical review committee meeting for August 26, 2026. Just a quick, for the tech committee members, when you are doing your comments for Acela, your initial comments, if you could put your, try to do your best to put the citations from like whatever manual ordinance that you're, you know, especially if it's a requirement not met. That's a lot for the design professionals, but that also helps Paula when she's putting the staff reports together so she doesn't have to chase down all those citations. Sometimes we talk about we're not sure exactly what you're referring to because we're not as familiar with the manuals as we are with the zoning ordinance. So if you just, when you're preparing your comments, if you can throw those citations in Acela with your comments, that would be fantastic. We would greatly appreciate that. And with that, we'll get going. Good morning. So to start the day off, the first eight plans are all one subdivision. So I'm not quite sure how we want to do this. Do we want to review and each plan individually and make a recommendation, or do we want to do them all at one time and then just do them? Okay. I just wanted to double check because anyway, so. Anyway, yeah, I grabbed all these because I was going on vacation, so I tried to do them all before I left. So please, some of them might have. We're at the Clark property. This is Polo Club Boulevard, and then we have Blackford Parkway that is going to tie back into Blackford Parkway over in the adjacent property. And what we're doing is we're looking at plats for the right-of-way and then all these lots on the south side of Blackford Parkway. So each plat, they're cutting out a portion of this. We have a trail that's going to go along the bottom here all the way through, and then there's a park, proposed park area with a couple HOA lots for access into the park area. So the first plat, which is Clark Property Unit 4A, the right-of-way on the property. Requirements not met. Addition of purpose on plan. Document compliance with the preliminary subdivision plan. Note requiring ADA ramps at Mock Orange Way and Buck Bush Pass. Denote exactions to the approval of the division of planning. Addition of provisions for maintenance of the median, if applicable. And then design considerations. Verify basin has been, should be sized for the development. Ensure curb box inlets and overflow swales along lot lines. And to review all the comments provided by the division of engineering. Plan questions or concerns. There are potential drainage issues on the interior of Tulip Poplar Walk. Does the storm easement need to be extended? And then staff recommendations with approval with the following sign-offs. Engineering, traffic, landscaping, addressing, urban forester, environmental quality, bike and ped, addition of utilities, U.S. Postal Service. And then correct all note deficiencies listed as requirements not met here on. So I'm going to open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. If anyone can be removed from this list. You can remove landscaping. Okay. Remove cap. Okay. Okay. Okay. Do we want to allow Rory to make comments or we want to wait and let him do it at the end? Each one has its own individual requirements not met and design considerations. So I think we need to have him for each one. Okay. Thank you. If there are any other comments. Morning. Rory Kaley with EA Partners. My only question comment would be under number two of requirements not met. The document compliance. This is dealing with ramps. Is my documentation just going to be engineering's signature on the Mylar? Or how am I, what's that mean? That's a comment by planning and I'm not sure how we want to resolve it. Okay. There's a note on the PSP that talks about some specific ones had to be ADA, but I thought every cross intersection had ADA. So I'm not sure why it's pulled out that way. It probably stems from some issues elsewhere that we want the engineer to look at the grades where ADA ramps are required to make sure that they're not too steep. These were the crossings that were closest to the park access. Okay. Anybody else? All right. So the motion is for approval of PLN FRP 2618 Clark property unit 4a with the removal of the landscape examiner's approval of landscaping and I didn't see cap on here. Is it, is it? Okay. Sorry, that was already, I'm sorry. So, so moved. All in favor? All right. Anyone opposed? Thank you. All right. So we'll move on down to the next one. This is FRP 2619 Clark property unit 4b. As you can see, they're proposing 15 single family residential lots on the property. This is Polo Club Boulevard coming into the Blackford property. And so we have the first, the first part of the property. So requirements not met to note the property shall be developed in accordance with the approved file approved preliminary subdivision plan to note the purpose of the plan to note lot numbers to match preliminary subdivision plan to note exactions to the approval of the division of planning to pick proposed easements no waivers design considerations verify basin has been sized for the development ensure curb box inlets and overflow swales align with lot lines review all seller comments by the division of engineering plan questions or concerns will a subdivision entrance sign be installed along Polo Club Boulevard and the easement may be needed there are potential drainage issues on the interior of tulip poplar walk does the storm easement need to be extended the staff recommends approval with the following sign offs engineering traffic landscaping addressing urban forest or department environmental quality bike and ped open space addition of utility and street light easements a U.S. postal service and correct all note deficiencies as listed as requirements not met in hereon and I will open it to the committee to see if there's any other comments or questions you can remove landscaping I was thinking the cap was part this was approved because it was part of the expansion area so there are no cap requirements so yeah it's all grandfathered in yes anyone else have any comments sure real quick uh open space being on here I don't believe that there's HOA or required open space for these so you can probably take open space planner off okay anyone else if not um number three under requirements not met our lot numbers match the construction plans which is very common when you take 300 acres or 300 lots and do them in phasing so I see that's a requirement not met how do I get that removed is it a action of this staff I mean this is we've had this discussion for years now that our lots have to meet the construction plans or a lot numbering more so than the preliminary plan from a few years ago so how do I do that make the construction plans match the preliminary well that won't happen we're going to change a lot the lot count everything will change from you know this this stage through this in the past it's always just been discussed it and it went away yeah you don't modify the preliminary subdivision plan to match the no we would never go back through the process of amending that just and we you know with 300 plus lots we're probably going to have four or five phases I don't think you guys want to see it every time we bring in the next phase I don't think we would mind but um yeah that's probably a question um yeah we do okay all right I'm stumping the staff today this is fun Cheryl can we just change that to a discuss and then we'll work that through with the applicant any questions on anything else I got a question lieutenant morgan fire um I know the roads are pretty much already out there for the entire scope of the project has a water plan been submitted you know as far as if the hydrants are out there yeah talked about phasing and that's why I'm kind of trying to zoom in on yes I believe that has all been um done I well I know the water line's designed so how do I get that to you yeah well if anything I can drive out there and just see if there's hydrants have not then we can kind of have that discussion and it's more of a heads up you know because I would definitely want to see if it hasn't been for the entirety of all of the projects instead of trying to see each so small piece yes it used to be with the preliminary subdivision plans and this one's you know a couple years old we would have had um that turned into the fire department at that time and hybrids would have been located throughout the whole development um so uh I can go back some old files and see if that's available as well all right yeah I'll work with you figure out thank you did you want to address the subdivision's entrance sign to be installed along oh yeah we'll probably add a entry wall feature easement like we usually do we'll talk with the developer see where she wants it and then looks like there's some um storm easement extension question uh tulip poplar walk appears on a couple plots later yeah I can speak to that a couple of those comments were kind of blanket comments for a lot of these first seven or eight the ones specific to tulip popper are I think 21 and 22 I believe um which we'll get to those here in a few minutes yeah we'll end up adding drainage easements once we're going yeah when we get when we get to that when we get to that one I'll comment more in detail on the tulip poplar section okay anybody else all right okay so let's see here uh the motions for approval of pln frp 2619 clark property unit 4b with the um amendment to note 300 requirements not met to discuss lot numbers to match preliminary subdivision plan the removal of landscape examiners approval of landscaping in the department of environmental qualities approval of environmental sensitive areas and green waste so moved all in favor anyone opposed all right thank you next okay we're moving down we're along polo club we just looked at this property right here to the north um so on this plot this purpose of this is to create eight single family residential lots this is frp 2620 clark property unit 4c requirements not met to note this property shall be developed in accordance with the approved preliminary subdivision plan number two denote purpose of plan number three we can go ahead and change that to discuss because it's the same note from previously um so discuss uh lot numbers to match the preliminary subdivision plan denote exactions to the approval of the division of planning uh denote 30 foot pedestrian access trail um this is really should be on um the clark property 4h and it's on there so this note i believe can be removed from here it was in my error um label tree protection area along the property boundaries design considerations verify basin has been sized for this development review all cell comments provided by the division of engineering playing questions or concerns there are potential drainage issues along the interior of tulip block there's no tulip block so i don't know if we can just remove it on this plan and then staff recommends approval with the following sign offs engineering traffic landscape addressing urban forest or environmental quality bike and ped open space addition of utilities and street lights u.s postal service and then correct all note deficiencies listed as requirements not met here on so i will open it to the committee to see if there's any other comments or questions if anyone can be removed at this time you can remove landscaping you can remove environmental quality you can remove open space well we've handled all the issues anything new on this one so anybody you're good all right yep all right all right the motions for approval of pln frp 26 20 clark property unit 4c um amending note three under requirements not met to discuss a lot numbers to match preliminary subdivision plan remove note five and the uh removal of um conditional sign offs for landscape examiner number three department of environmental quality number six and open space planner number eight so moved all favor in the post all right next okay we're going around black for um this is plan frp 26 21 clark property unit 4d um they are creating 20 single family residential lots under requirements not met to note that this property shall be developed in accordance with the approved preliminary subdivision plan to note purpose of plan number three change to note to discuss um number four denote exactions to the approval of division of planning number five can be removed and label trees protection area along boundaries of property design considerations verify basin has been sized for this development review all the solid comments by division of engineering uh playing questions or concerns on the interior of tulip pop their walk i'm not sure if this is tulip poplar yeah this is the tulip poplar walk um does a storm easement need to be extended then the staff recommends approval with the following sign-offs engineering traffic landscaping addressing urban forester environmental quality bike and ped open space addition of utility and street lights u.s postal service and then correct all note deficiencies listed as requirements not met here on and i open it to the committee to see if anybody can have any comments or want to be removed from this list landscaping can be removed environmental quality can be removed open space can be removed okay um we're agreeable with the revisions cheryl mentioned and there will be additional drainage easements around tulip poplar walk um so we got a loop street top button yeah so there's a loop street here we've got a storm's inlet that'll take the water out and we'll end up having a bunch of drainage easements from the all the rear lots coming to that same inlet uh yeah i think that was our biggest concern was anytime you get a circular situation like that this is the center could trap and hold water if you're not careful so just make sure we don't hold a bunch of water back there all right anybody else worry that's it okay uh recommend or the motions for approval of p o n f rp 26 21 clark property unit 4d uh with revision to note number three discuss lot numbers to match preliminary subdivision plan removal of note five and the removal of conditional sign offs for number three landscape examiner number six department of environmental quality and number eight open space so moved all in favor is anyone opposed all right next okay we're moving forward frp 26 22 clark property unit 4e um the pro this one is proposing i'm sorry 17 single family residential lots this is the remaining part of the tulip poplar walk that we were just right here so here's where you were talking about where it circles back around to blackford property so with this we have requirements not met to note property shall be developed in accordance with the approved preliminary subdivision to note purpose of plan number three change denote to discuss number four denote exactions to the approval of the division of planning five can be removed um label tree protection area along the property boundaries design considerations verify that the basement has been sized for this development plan review all acela comments provided by division of engineering the drainage issues on the interior of tulip poplar walk the staff recommends approval with the following sign offs engineering traffic landscape and addressing urban forest or environmental quality biking pad open space you took addition of utilities and street lights u.s postal service and then correct all note deficiencies as listed requirements not met here on i'll open it to the committee to see if there's any other comments or questions if anyone can be removed from this list you can remove landscaping you remove environmental quality you can remove open space okay exactly what we said last time all good unless you got questions does anybody have anything else okay motions for approval of pln frp 26 22 clark property unit 4e um with the um changing to discuss on requirements not met note but three discussed a lot numbers to match plenary so division plan the removal of note number five and then the removal of sign offs for landscape examiner department of environmental quality and open space planner so moved all in favor you want to post all right function passes okay we're we're moving forward frp 26 23 clark property unit 4f this proposal of creating 10 single family lots this is the continuation of blankford parkway here we're creating a circle the trail systems behind here which now is adjacent to the park for the city requirements not met here here on denote the property shall be developed in accordance with the approved preliminary denote purpose of plan change to note to discuss on three uh denote exactions to the approval of planning remove number five uh number six label tree protection and area along property boundaries document compliance with preliminary subdivision plan note requiring ada ramps at mock orange court intersection which is this court here and then denote lot 112 as lfucg not hoa per note number 15 on preliminary subdivision plan no waivers design considerations verify basin has been sized for this development review all the solid comments by the division of engineering playing questions or concerns for our potential drainage issues on the interior uh to the popular walk i believe this one can be removed from here okay with that the staff recommends approval with the following sign-offs engineering traffic landscape addressing urban forester get everybody on here um department of environmental quality bike and ped open space addition of utilities and streetlights division of parks and rec the united states postal office and then correct all note deficiencies solicitors requirements not met here on we'll open it to the committee to see if anyone can comment on this we'll open it to the committee to see if anyone can be removed from this list landscaping can be removed environmental quality can be removed open space do you want to be on here okay and cheryl have a question rory's maybe already discussed this with someone but um i would think that the lot 112 is going to be hoa or developer owned until the purchase of the property or something happens the note the note on the preliminary plan talked about the dedication of it with i believe the street um so do we need to denote who the dedication goes to is lfucg okay is it specifically parks and rec i'm not sure um what you know that and and the next corner or the next plan will have the corner piece so that on the corner there the tip there's two lots on either side those are labeled right now as hoa and they're both supposed to go to the city and that's going to present this big um corner entrance into the park system um so it's let's see i'll be out here so the park follows this line and once we get to here the park joins in with the recorded lot that is the legacy trail as well so it's all park property um it's the main entrance i believe there i just need to know if it's i think it's dedicated with the recordation of the plat i'm not sure how that works well this this plat's creating a lot so maybe if it goes with the right-of-way dedication should it be on the back yeah that's a good question well no the first plot was just the road okay yeah it was just the road but is well dedication to lfucg is that universal whether it's a street or property or does it need to go to parks or someone else that's a good question yeah i don't know that we distinguish between ownership we distinguish between maintenance and so i don't know that that i think that's what you're that's what the that seems to be what the question would be right like like all lfgc lfucg owns the right-of-way and the park but it's really who maintains it so i would think that it would be on this on this plat because it'd be different the maintenance part isn't addressed in the plat that's something we do internally this to me is about the dedication of the right of the right-of-way and the and the land to lfucg i could be wrong that makes more sense to me to be on this plat parks sign off might answer that question too again yeah but um the the maintenance issue we deal with internally that could change you know what i mean even with time so to me it makes more sense for it to be on that on that dedication on the public the lfucg dedication plan or but the roads are are all like so like this cul-de-sac is that going to be dedicated to the public or is that going to be private no they're all public streets and they're um the main boulevard was done on 4a and then you can see that this mock orange is part of this plat with its full dedication so yeah we were getting the road in but so it's on its own piece but that cul-de-sac bulb isn't part of the initial the first no it's part of 4f so there's going to be right away dedicated with this so it could stay on this yeah i have the note here i can barely read it but it says um it's okay to be on this basically it's when you create the lot it's being dedicated so you're creating a lot on this plat so it's it's right it was just but you were saying one thing should it say lfucg not hoa yes okay yeah i gotta get the hoa off there okay in the past sometimes lfucg wasn't taking our greenways right away we had to go through a process so i left it as hoa but this time it clearly says that the city's to get it upon recordation all right i got one question lot 70 71 and i know 112 is hoa i see sanitary easements for every lot so far but i don't see any sanitary on 70 71 and 112 all right we'll find those and if it makes you feel any more comfortable when the mylars come in and all of the as belts are complete we all go through the process of reviewing as belts with the plots it's the engineer's responsibility but i try to double check him as best as i can oh she checks everyone trust me okay anybody else rory you good okay so the motions for approval of pln frp 26 23 clark property unit 4f amending note number three under requirements not met to discuss removal of note number five under requirements not met the removal of note number one under plan questions or concerns the removal of landscape examiner and department of environmental quality sign offs under conditions uh so moved all in favor anyone opposed and the motion passes okay we're almost done we're going to frp 26 24 clark property unit 4g we have blackford parkway up here they have the park area here here is another the other hoa lot that um we'll go into that for dedication to the park with that requirements not met the property shall be developed in accordance with the approved preliminary subdivision plan denote purpose of plan change to denote to discuss on number three denote exactions to the approval of division of planning you can remove note number five um label tree protection area along the property boundaries document compliance with the preliminary subdivision plan note with the ada at buck bush which this is the buck bush pass right here that they're denoting uh denote lot number 1 13 as lfucg not hoa per note 15 design considerations uh verify basin has been sized for development review acela comments provided by division of engineering the plan questions or concerns this is potential drainage issue we can remove this off here okay and with that the staff recommends approval with the following sign offs engineering traffic landscaping addressing urban forest or environmental quality bike and ped open space addition of utility and street lights division of parks and rec and the united states postal service and then correct all note deficiencies requirements not met here on i'll ask again if there's any comments or questions or anyone that can be removed from this list landscape can be removed you can remove open space nothing more to add on this one anybody have anything if not the motions for approval of pln frp 26 24 clark property nothing more to add on this one anybody have anything if not the motions for approval of pln frp 26 24 clark property unit 4g with the amendment of note number three under requirements not met to discuss lot numbers to match preliminary subdivision plan the removal of note number five under requirements not met removal of note number one under plans questions uh plan questions or concerns and the removal of sign offs for landscape examiner open space planner and environmental quality so moved on favor is anyone opposed all right motion passes okay last one um this is frp 26 25 clark property unit 4h um you can see here we're at the end of but but bush pass and then barley field lane um we are creating 17 single family residential and one hoa this hoa right here is our trail our pedestrian access trail that we have on the property that's where the just the question of number five came in so with the requirements not met to note that the property shall be developed in accordance with the approved preliminary subdivision plan to note purpose of plan number three change denote to discuss denote exactions to the approval of the division of planning number five was to to denote the 30 foot pedestrian access trail from the preliminary subdivision number six is label tree protection area along property boundaries number seven document compliance with note number 16 from the preliminary subdivision plan for lot 114 design considerations verify basin has been sized for this development review all the comments provided by division of engineering number uh playing questions or concerns i believe we can remove this because we've discussed that um with that the staff recommends approval with the following sign offs engineering traffic landscaping addressing urban forester environmental quality bike and ped open space addition of utilities and streetlights the u.s postal service and then correct all note deficiencies so with that i'll open it to the committee to see if there's any other comments or questions or if anyone can be removed from this list landscaping can be removed open space can be removed all right anybody have anything else no all right um in agreement with all the changes as cheryl read them okay all right i do have one question might want to notice on lot 97 sanitary sewer easement kind of looks like it's abandoned there oh yeah neolateral over from that back corner okay all right anybody else all right the motions for approval of pln frp 26 25 clock property unit 4h with the amendment of note number three under requirements not met to discuss the removal of note number one under plans questions and concerns and the removal of sign offs for landscape examiner and open space planner so moved all in favor anyone opposed thank you all right all right believe it or not we have plans that aren't the clark property um okay next plan frp 26 26 ashland park edition block a lot one this is located at 100 south hanover avenue the purpose of this plan is to subdivide the subject property into two lots so we're at the corner of richmond road here and hanover avenue here they're showing the subject property has two existing structures on it residential structures they're proposing a to divide the property there this does meet the minimum lot size for the the zone this showing the the two existing structures here so under requirements not met we asked to provide an exhibit showing the proximity of the existing structures to the side and rear property lines um from the aerial it just looks like it's really close to the property line um closer than the uh the plat shows so we just we just want to verify um that that that made so if you can just something that um showing the the uh the setback what the actual distance is um number two correct the parcel addresses lot 1a to 110 and lot 1b to 100 um number three add all required street tree information and notes under design considerations number one a sanitary sewer application is required number two the lots will need two independent connections to the sanitary sewer main or a reciprocal maintenance agreement number one discuss the existing structures is non-conforming and then we do recommend approval with the following sign offs engineering traffic engineering landscaping addressing urban forest or environmental qualities approval of environmentally sensitive areas bike ped open space addition of utility and streetlight easements as required by the utility companies and the urban county traffic engineer number 10 document division water qualities approval of the cap requirements uh postal service and then finally to correct all the noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met herein and with that i'll open it up to the committee for discussion and if anybody can be removed from the sign off list landscaping can be removed environmental quality can be removed um take off bike and pen as well open space can be removed all right any other discussion okay gary rowland with cam surveying um just quickly as far as the set where the property line is in relationship to the structures there's 11 feet between the structures we've got the property line just right in the middle between those i think it's a six foot minimum side yard but through averaging i think we can meet the zoning ordinance the required setback on that um i don't really have anything else if anybody has any questions i'd be happy to answer everybody good okay thanks gary all right the motions for approval of pln frp 26 26 ashton park addition block a lot one with the removal of sign-offs for a landscape examiner department of environmental quality bike and pedestrian planner and open space planner so moved all in favor anyone opposed all right motion all right move along this is our first development plan mjdp 2662 j4 being signs at hayman subdivision the standard of lexington this is located at 633 south broadway 441 hayman lane 653 lower street 416 through 442 even only and 451 chair avenue and the purpose of this plan is to depict multi-family development in a cn and i1 zone this recently went through a zone change so this is the final development plan associated with this on your plan we've got oliver lewis way to plan north and broadway to the right this is chair avenue that goes through kind of the sort of the middle of the site this is scott street that comes down and this is depicting the scott street extension the proposed extension that doesn't currently exist this is lower street here that turns into hayman and which then comes out and intersects south broadway so what the plan is showing is the current development with also the future proposed scott street extension a little bit closer this is kind of the main residential building here we've got m line and chair and scott street and oliver lewis so it's this this portion is actually right of way around the parcel so it's kind of a little bit unconventional in that sense um then this is this is the other residential structure we've got chair avenue here and lower street there's a little bit of surface parking here they're proposing to connect the two residential structures with a pedestrian bridge on the fifth story as well as a pedestrian bridge to the parking structure i believe also on the fifth story and then this shows the parking structure to the southwest here's again here's lower street that turns into hayman with broadway over here now this parcel isn't part of the development plan but in the kind of in the middle here it does go all the way out to broadway so this is kind of their their main frontage on broadway and then this is just the aerial of the site again we've got chair avenue that kind of goes through the middle with oliver lewis here broadway here and then the subject properties outlined in in green this is just kind of showing existing conditions let's see i think go back to the main development plan under requirements not met number one denote all buildings paving signs fences walls and retaining walls shall require a separate review and building permit from the division of building inspection prior to construction number two provide a vicinity map for your common open space in your open space exhibit number three depict the zone lines just distinguish between the cn and the i1 and the surrounding zones where applicable number four depict property perimeter landscape requirements along oliver lewis way number five provide a lighting plan that meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance number six correct purpose of the plan to include the i1 zone number seven extend the sidewalk adjacent to the parking garage and open space out to south broadway and i believe that's to connect from here out to broadway number eight define parking along one side of chair avenue by adding bulb outs at all intersections including emeline lane number nine commercial driveway entrances shall comply with standard drawing 307-2 number 10 label street cross sections cross sections existing or proposed as appropriate number 11 recordation of lot consolidation must be completed prior to certification and number 12 retaining wall is not permitted over service lateral there are no waivers requested at this time under design considerations consider adding short-term bicycle parking at the proposed bus stop location number two some of the short-term bike parking locations will impede on the adjacent sidewalks when in use number three ensure access at the bend in the new storm box run number four encroachment agreement permit will be required for the pedestrian bridges that cross the public right-of-way number five clarify purpose of double line inside 15-foot storm easement and number six see all cell comments provided by the division of engineering under plan questions or concerns confirm this location will have trash compactors and no dumpsters number two discuss retaining wall area has vegetated open space and he correct me if i'm wrong but i believe that's is that the retaining walls along chair avenue along the the center building here um number three do your interior courtyards have pedestrian access number four discuss additional square footage for usable open space on lot four number five discuss location of drop drop-off pickup and delivery spaces number six discuss right-of-way dedication and scott street termination of lower street number seven provide renderings elevations detail and compliance with the designs provided during the zone change process number eight discuss sanitary sewer connection points number nine what is the stormwater management plan for the new parking lot west of lower street and again that's the surface parking here um 10 our right-of-way improvements proposed for emeline lane chair avenue and south broadway if so please depict on plan number 11 discuss stormwater management planning construction phasing of the culvert realignment number 12 discuss location of green infrastructure or manufactured treatment devices that are indicated in the stormwater report number 13 discuss where drainage will be rerouted when the storm structures in hayman avenue are removed and number 14 are you intending to request acquisition of right-of-way and convert lower street to a private street or easement and then we do recommend approval with the following sign offs engineering traffic engineering landscaping addressing urban forest or environmental quality bike ped open space division of fire division of waste management documentation of water qualities approval of the cap requirements u.s postal service and then finally to correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met and with that i'll open it up to the committee for discussion if there's anybody that can be removed all right is there happening good morning for the record my name is jihad hallani was vision engineering so under requirement not met so number one has been noted we'll add vicinity vicinity map on the open space we'll address the zoning line i guess we'll add some landscaping along oliver lewis and we'll address the lighting plan so number seven extend the sidewalk so i just want to discuss briefly with you guys that from the parking garage to south broadway there's don't hold me on it but close 10 to 12 feet grade elevation so we can add the sidewalk but it's going to require multiple of steps if this is the intent for it to be that way we'll be glad to add it so the finished floor elevation of so the finished floor elevation of i messed it up okay okay sorry so the finished floor elevation of the parking garage is like 9 32.68 and the roadway is like close to 9 75 something like that 9 45 yeah so it doesn't have to there's a sidewalk that goes adjacent to the parking garage and then goes into the parking garage it doesn't have to be an extension from there i think it becomes how do people and then the connectivity to other sites. So it could start on the opposite side and come all the way out. It could come off of that existing sidewalk somewhere else to make up those grades. It didn't have to come off of that spot where you're showing the connection to the garage. It's more of creating that connection out to the transit stop through the open space so that it's accessible, right? Correct. What are we talking about, that requirement? So we were kind of working together on this, so if I've left anything out. No, that was perfect. So does that make more sense? Like, it doesn't have to connect to that extension. We realize there's a grade change between the property that's adjacent to you as well, so that makes it difficult. So it could be anywhere along that edge. We can discuss it and find a route that can be accessible to that. Right, so there couldn't be steps in it, though, that makes it nice, right? Yes, exactly. Okay, just make sure we made that clear to you. Yes, sir, I understand. Thank you. Define parking along one side of Chair Avenue. I don't believe we are adding any parking, so not the intent, at least. If we are showing something, it's not intended to be. The pavement width is approximately 27 to 29 feet, so we don't have enough room for parking. So we're not going to have any parallel parking along Chair Avenue. Yeah, so with Lieutenant Morgan Fire, yeah, I mean, if you're not gonna have any sort of parking on both sides, I mean, that gives us our appropriate access. I just would have to maintain that 20-foot minimum clear width, and I didn't know if you were gonna allow parking on one side, and if so, what side would that be? So, if anything, you may want just to note that there's not gonna be parking on either side. Okay, perfect. Well, and also, you are okay with parking on one side, provided there's 20-foot clear remaining. Yeah, absolutely. Correct, and so you said it varies from 29 to 27 feet, and we can go down to as low as seven feet. For parking, and so what we want to be able to do is denote where that would be, so that when people do park there, they're parking in the spots that allow for emergency access. So we just want that roadway to be utilized the way it will be utilized, which people will want to park on it, and making sure that we can see how that works. And it also shortens those crosswalks at those intersections. So, depending on which side best serves the buildings, that would be the side that you'd want to put, denote that parking on, and make sure that you would remain 20-foot clear with those bulb outs. If I understand you guys correctly, as long as we maintain 20 feet of driving lanes, we can add parallel parking if we decide to add parallel parking. Correct, and that would allow you to bulb out at the intersection to know where that parking is, right? So it makes sense to the people who are using the roadway. Sure. Because there could be pickup and drop-off there as well, however you all would want to use that. That's the other concern that we have, is that there's nothing indicating where pickup, drop-off deliveries are. Yeah, we are planning to use the surface parking for- But the UPS driver's not gonna pull into that lot and deliver to that big building. What, I mean- They're gonna stop in the middle of Chair Avenue like they did last week on Broadway, and block Broadway. Not on this site, on a different site, but the UPS driver stopped in Broadway to deliver, that's what they're gonna do here on Chair Avenue. We have a concern that there's no place designated for proximate deliveries, pickup, drop-off, because you can say that they're gonna use that parking lot, but realistically, people aren't gonna do that. They're gonna try to get as close to the door as they can, and you're not allowing for that pickup, drop-off near the door. Sure. Yeah, the reason we thought this is reasonable, just because it's very close to the main door, and lower street, in case there is, it's very low flow of traffic, I mean, lower street in the first place. This is more just so that the public right-of-way tells people where they can park, right? And Chair Avenue is public, right? That's not private? Yeah. And so, we just want that parking to be on one side, and addressed with design intent to show where that should be, not just lane striping. Does that make sense? So that way, how it gets used, could be short-term, long-term. Right now, it just would be free parking, or drop-off, or whatever use it would be. But that's what we're looking for. Okay, so there's an indication you guys like to see some kind of parallel parking, at least close to the door, for delivery. Especially if the road's gonna be 27 to 29 feet, yeah. That's right. It's far wider than necessary for just to get traffic, so yeah. Yeah, we'll make it work. And then the bull by would be at the crossings with, what's the name of that street? Chair, and lower, and Emmeline. Yeah, and Emmeline, yeah. So then that just says it's on this side, or that side, or whichever side you want. All right, yeah, we can do that. Okay. When, also too, just kind of consider and think about whenever you decide what side you want to do parking, or not, just make sure you take into account your fire hydrant placement, that you have the proper clearance in front of it. So, if your hydrants are on one side, it may be advantageous to have parking on the opposite side. So, just kind of think about that. Okay. All right, thank you. Commercial driveway, yes. So, that would be based on standard drawing 307. We'll label cross-section. That's what I want to discuss with you on number 11, for lot consolidation. We understand we have to do a lot of consolidation, but is this something can be done at the building permit stage? Because now it's, you know, this development plan, hopefully it goes through, and then the purchase of the property happen, then they're going to go. So, the timing is going to be very important. I'm assuming you meant certification of the development plan. I think my comment said denote consolidations required, and I don't know that I gave a time frame, but there may be something in the ordinance or regulations that I don't, and in my mind, building permit, before the building permit is when it's required, but it also references a zoning ordinance, or wait, no, yeah. So, no, wait. So, you want me to say on not number 11 bond, to add the note that lot consolidation must be done or something like that? To add the note for lot consolidation? I think at the very least, we would need the note on the plan that says denote prior to building permit. Yes, we're good with that. Yeah, thank you. Yes, retaining wall not permitted over service line, so we're going to move the service line where there's no retaining walls. Design consideration, adding short-term parking, that's no problem. Some of the short-term parking location will impede the adjacent sidewalk, we'll rotate them 90 degrees. Ensure access to the bend of the stormwater, of the boxer culvert. Our intent is to add at least two access point, one access point here, and one access point here, and potentially one access point here. So, there's two connection and one bend, so we're going to add some way to get there. Encroachment agreement will be required for the bridge, so we can add the note that the encroachment agreement has to be added, and then has to be complete prior to building permit, okay? The purpose of, I mean, the double line over here, this is an existing retaining wall, so that building is six feet or so higher than that pad over here right now, so that's an existing retaining wall. I think it looked like it was inside the storm easement, but if it's existing, label it as is. Correct, yeah, we'll label it. On plan question and concern, confirm the location of the trash. So, there are going to be two compactors inside the buildings. There will be one compactor in that location here, and then there will be another compactor in that location over here. Cameron Fogle from Waste Management. That would be the only thing, is compactors and not dumpsters? Yes, sir. All right. Discuss the retaining wall area for the vegetation, and- It should be listed as usable open space. I'm just unsure that a retaining wall can be usable, unless people are climbing on it and having fun. Well, the wall, I mean, it's like, the reason for this wall is just to make the access to the building handicap accessible. So, basically, these are like a ramp. So, these walls are, we're talking about, like, less than two feet. They're like a knee kind of, what do you call it, knee wall or something like that. I think it's okay to count the wall as vegetated open space. Again, I'm just unsure that's usable, so. Okay. All right. Do the interior courtyard has any access, pedestrian? The only access will be the resident. So, it's not open to public. So, I guess it will be, in a sense, it can be usable for the people living there, so. That's fine. Yeah. We just need to show those access points on the open space exhibit. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Discuss additional square footage for usable open space on lot four. Yeah, we can add, we have plenty of room. We can add as much as we need to. Discuss location of drop-off, pickup, and delivery. We just discussed it. Right-of-way dedication and Scott Street termination. This is kind of a little bit of a timing thing for the project. So, I'm not sure about timing of Scott Street. We have been working with engineering about, as we move forward with the project, we have been in contact with engineering and sharing drawing with them. But my understanding of the timing is that this project may materialize before Scott Street. So, at that time, no need to change in street network or any of this stuff is going to be functioning as is. So, just because this is how the timing is going to dictate things. What the stormwater management for, so, for the new parking lot west of Lower Street. So, we did the drainage study, and we included that parking lot. So, the post-development impervious area is less than the pre-development impervious area. So, technically, we're not planning any stormwater management from detention point of view, but we will be providing some water quality devices, like storm scepters or downstream defender. And most probably, they're going to be treating the runoff generated from that parking place. Discuss sanitary sewer connection point. This two building is kind of large volume of flow based on almost 985 beds. So, we are proposing multiple of connection to the sanitary sewer. So, we're going to have at least four connection point to the sanitary sewers. So, basically, that line is going to move to that location where there's no retaining wall, and then we'll have another one in that location here, and there is two location for the southern building, and then there's one sanitary sewer connection from the parking garage into the new, into the relocated 18-inch sanitary line. So, a total will have five connection points. So, there will be some connections into the new relocated line? Yes, there will be one connection, and most probably will be in the manhole. What's your intent with the sanitary underneath the building area? Is it a removal or a cap? Yes, the box culvert and the sanitary sewer will be totally removed, and then engineered field will be placed and compacted. What the stormwater management for the new parking lot? I guess we discuss it. A right-of-way improvement proposed for Emilian Chair and South Broadway. I guess other than what we discussed right now to add this parking spaces and reworking the, there's multiple of entrance, especially on Chair Avenue. It has to be removed, and put new curb is going to be poured, and plus widening the sidewalk and adding the parking spaces. That will be the only improvement on the right-of-way. I guess that kind of ties back to the comment about the cross-section showing proposed, or existing and proposed. That way it'd be more clear on what is being done. Especially after the conversation today, it need to be adjusted significantly. Discuss the stormwater management plan and the construction phasing of the culvert. So the project is going to be phased at least to two major phases. Phase one is going to be, other than the demolition, is going to be the relocation of the box culvert. The existing culvert right now is eight by eight. We are proposing to relocate it with 10 by eight, forming kind of that shape. And also the relocation of the sanitary sewers that can run parallel to the culvert, existing one, is going to still run parallel to the culvert along that route over here. So this would be the phase two of the project. And also we'd like to discuss with engineering to see if there's any way we can get an early package to kind of start the relocation. Discuss the location of the green infrastructure or the manufactured treatment devices. So most probably is going to be at the surface parking because this is usually the most pollutant will be, not from the building. So that will have the best benefit is to have it in the parking, the surface parking. Discuss where the drainage will be routed from the storm structure on Hayman. So there is an existing 12 inch pipe along that run here that goes underneath the building. That line is going to be rerouted along Hayman and basically tied to that lines that goes between the parking garage and the existing building in this 15 feet easement. This line is 36 inch pipe, so the tie-in will be in that location. Are you intended to request acquisition of right away or convert lower street to a private street? Again, the timing is kind of dictating everything, how the sequence of things going to be, giving the projects going to be first. So we have no intention to do anything at this time. But there's one thing I want to discuss with you guys over here. Basically the property line, it's not very clear, but the property line is kind of coming along that corner, which is kind of was in lower street. This is something I want to discuss with you, how to kind of either keep it that way or have an easement or if we need to dedicate right away just for that corner so we can dedicate right away. But this is something I'd like to meet with you and discuss with traffic and engineering if possible. And if you have any question for me, I would be glad to answer it. One comment real quick. Just typically we ask for the consolidation plant to be done prior to certification of the development plan because when you do it prior to the certification of the development plan, you remove all the property lines that you're consolidating and it kind of clears up the development plan so you don't have all those miscellaneous property boundaries. A consolidation plant is a staff item and it does not go in front of the technical committee or anything. So it can be filed at any time. You could do it now and we can start the process of reviewing it and doing the consolidation plant prior to the certification of this development plan. It helps to clean up your development plan and it just kind of makes sure that it's all one piece of property. Yes, ma'am. I agree with everything you said but the challenge we have is technical challenge because if we go back to the building, okay, as you can tell when we do the consolidation plant, there's multiple of businesses and property owners and things like that. So it's kind of hard to kind of all work together at this time of this phase of this project. So our- I'm just saying then your development plan is gonna have property boundaries and when you go to get your building permit, that causes kind of sometimes causes issues because you're building on top of a property line that you can't build on. Sure. So I just, so typically in the past, it's always been done prior to certification of the DP. Well, if we can put a note to be done prior to building permit, if it's okay with everybody, we'll be glad to kind of do it. So we'll add a note saying that to be done prior to building permit. So that doesn't help with the clarity of the drawing but it does help meet the condition that you're concerned with? Is that okay? Okay. Okay. It just helps to clear up. Right. Okay. So, there's not one property owner for all of these lots at this point? Oh, I need to check. It might be, I'm just saying, but at least there's multiple of businesses, that's for sure. I don't know if it's one property or multiple of property. I can check on this. If it's all one property, you might as well do the consolidation plan. I mean. Yeah, I don't know. I mean, if a note served the purpose, we'd prefer the note, if possible. But. So, I guess the one is a kind of a clean up or a drawing clean up, but the other is an actual condition for the building permit. So, I guess what you're asking is if that note saying that it would, the consolidation plan would be done prior to the building permit, that would serve the intent of what we need. It just doesn't help with the clarity. Is that, are you all okay with that for this? Okay. And to your point, and you probably did this with the preliminaries. Every property owner has to be on the development plan too, right, to sign. They may just be one, so yeah, okay. They have to all sign off, okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you guys. Anybody have anything else? You can remove 13 under plain questions and concerns. Okay. Anything else? All right, hearing none. The motion is for, is there an approval for this one? Is for approval of PON MJDP 2662, J. Forbing & Sons, and Hayman Subdivision with the removal of note 13 under plans, questions, or concerns. So moved. You want to change? Oh, we need to. Change number 11, the recommendation of block consolidation must be prior to building permit. To add note, denote. Yeah, add to note. Okay, let's do that again. So the motion's for approval of PLN MJDP 2662, J. Forbing & Sons, and Hayman Subdivision, changing note 11 to denote block consolidation must be completed prior to building permits, prior to building permits, and the removal of note number 13 under plan, questions, or concerns. So moved. Second. All in favor? Is anyone opposed? All right, the motion passes. Okay, moving along. Our next plan, MJDP 2664. This is Ramsey Sullivan, phase three, lot three. We've got Spur Road here. It's Georgetown out here. Is this Innovation? Can't remember the road name. Okay, yep, there we go. So we're specifically looking at this lot here. Do a little bit of a blow-up. Okay, I didn't have an aerial. Apologize for that. So they're depicting a display in sales area around a sales office building and a garage area in the rear. They're coming off of Spur Road across from Innovation and the public parking out front, and then the drive circles back to Spur Road. And then there's a detention basin in this corner up here, and we'll discuss that a little bit later, too. And this is for a, it's a heavy machinery dealership. Under requirements not met, number one, denote areas with alluvial soils will be developed in accordance with Article 6-11 of the Land Subdivision Regulations. Number two, no building permit shall be issued unless and until a final development plan is certified by the Secretary of State. And number three, no building permit until a final development plan is certified by the Secretary of the Planning Commission. Number three, denote automatic and manual gate systems shall require the pre-approval of the Lexington Fire Department Water Control Office prior to being installed. Automatic gates shall have the click to enter system. Number four, update dumpster enclosure details to current requirements. Number five, add mitigation proposal to tree protection plan and development plan. Number six, upload open space exhibit to Acela and include open space requirements in the site statistics as a percentage. Number seven, remove references to proposed zones and right-of-way. Number eight, clarify purpose of amendment language. Number nine, denote the written scale. Number 10, correct title block to match the staff report. Number 11, denote record plat name and owner's name of adjacent property. Number 12, remove note number 21 if it's no longer necessary. Number 13, denote construction entrance location. Number 14, denote height of buildings and feet. Number 15, utilize standard site statistics box and we can send that to you if you don't have it. Number 16, provide lighting plan that conforms with Article 30 of the zoning ordinance and you can get with me on that. I looked at it, I can't remember exactly what I saw but we have a review checklist I can send to you and examples if you need that. Number 17, depict solvents traces right-of-way. Number 18, label all sidewalks to include a six-inch curb for grade separation. Number 19, revise bicycle parking so it will not block sidewalk when in use. Number 20, pedestrian crossings over 24 feet must be raised. Number 21, list the interior tree canopy required and provide it as square footage only and not a number of trees. Number 22, dimension all entrances and paved entrance to storage area with gravel shoulder. 23, locate stormwater management on the development plan. And number 24, depict the proposed storm sewer or drainage easements for pass-through drainage for two pipes from Spur Road. There are no waivers at this time. Design considerations, number one, a sanitary sewer capacity application is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Number two, see all Acela comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Under plan questions and concerns, number one, will the dumpster enclosure have gates? Number two, discuss note number 10 regarding the additional bike lanes or sidewalks to be resolved at the time of final development plan. Number three, discuss note number 22 regarding drainage along Spur Road. And number four, discuss note number 23 regarding the installation of bus stop facilities. Number five, discuss whether public improvements have been dedicated and the gap between Sullivan's Trace and Spur Road. Now I remember why I should have put the aerial on there. There's a small gap in the parcels between Sullivan's Trace and Spur Road. Let's see, number six, discuss internal circulation. Number seven, discuss gate depicted in the display area. And I believe that's this area here. Number eight, will the three gates be automatic or manual? Number nine, will the heavy machinery display areas meet fire apparatus access requirements? Number 10, address how the shared use path crosses the 40 foot access. Number 11, discuss paving options for the air relief valve located in the exit drive. And I think that was something that Chris brought up in the meeting last week. I believe that's in that area there. And number 12, discuss who will own and maintain the stormwater management areas. We are recommending approval with the sign-offs, engineering, traffic engineering, landscaping, addressing, urban forester, environmental quality, like PED, open space, fire, waste management, water qualities approval, the CAP requirements, U.S. Postal Service, and then finally to correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met herein. And with that, I'll turn it over to the committee. There's one I forgot to add. Oh, okay. Section 1615, commercial access standard, which include light and heavy industrial building to conform with the LFGCG standard drawing 3072 for entrances. Okay, under requirements not met. Yeah, and then if we can remove, I know Scott put number 20 on there, pedestrian crossings over 24, that doesn't apply to industrial zones, so that one can be removed. Is that number? Number 20. 20, the pedestrian, okay. So we'll remove 20. Yeah, yeah, so add section not conforming to 1615B, which is for the commercial, it says commercial, but in the initial section, it indicates that these actually apply to industrial, light and heavy industrial uses too, which is a 40 foot entrance is allowed and for industrial use, so I think it's just a matter of construction. Did you have that note in the cellar? I didn't, no. Oh, okay. That's why, yeah, I was looking, I was like, oh, no. Okay. All right, anything else from the committee? You can remove addressing. Remove addressing. That's number four. Thank you all. Michael Barlow, I'm the engineer representing the owner. Just want to go through a couple of the discussion points. Number two, discuss additional bike lanes or sidewalks to be resolved at time of final development plan. We're showing, oh, what did I do? Bottom button. Did I go too far? You did what I did. I did upside down. Oh, it's okay. I did the same thing. There we go, there's a full one. We are showing bike paths along all of Spur Road. The plan was to not install for this portion until at time of construction for the building and all development. Anything else to discuss on that? So each lot will be responsible for building the trail? Is that? Correct. Right, okay. Would that be like, it needs to be built by certificate of occupancy or something? Is that what you're? I guess when they, yeah, when they try to do their, like I said, would it be final record plan or would it be a time of occupancy? The lots have already been created, right? Yeah. Now most of them have. And three as well. Well. Yeah, I guess it would be some note related to the timing of when that's constructed, which would be, you know, as a part of this development plan. Okay. Discuss number, note number 22 regarding drainage along Spur Road. We have a water quality green swale that needs to be finalized along lot two and goes into lot three as well. So that'll be part of the construction plans. Anything else to discuss on that? The bus stop, it's gonna be on lot one. Down here. And the plan was to finalize the exact specifications of it around the time of lot one final development plan. Okay. All right, and then that's all I have. Any other questions for me? There was the question about whether the Spur Road dedication to the state had happened because we don't necessarily see that. And I think Cheryl had pointed out a gap or something near or right here. Yeah, it has not occurred yet. We are trying to get the bond released. I think there's a couple items remaining on that and then we'll record it. So maybe we need to add a note about timing for that. Okay. Barricades down, the solvents trace is open. She's trying to figure out how they're gonna address the gap in right of way. The little, yeah. Flat for solvents trace got recorded. So I guess part of it's the city until the state takes their part. I don't know. The city portion is open and recorded. The state. Yeah, that portion will be state right away. I do have one question. You'll be crossing a force mine in two different locations. An ARV is in the exit. Yes, we got. A relief valve located within that exit. I do understand that's customer entrance, right? The first entrance, you will also be crossing the force mine. So that is an existing portion of that entrance that's already built. Will the heavier stuff be coming in that entrance? It will. So we'll have to provide a appropriate design for heavy industrial crossing on that as well. Just real quick on the, if you bubble over your sign location, that may have to get tweaked slightly just to get away from that force mine. Yeah, yeah. Get the foundation out of there. Yeah. Discussion about moving it back a little bit. Okay. So I had a question about the 40 foot entrance. David, did you mention a note about that? Yeah, they'll just have to build it according to the industrial entrance standard. Is that a apron? Yeah, yeah. Okay, so that's what I was questioning is the speed at which that turn can be made. And so those aprons generally help to slow down the vehicles coming in. So I think that that note that David, under conditions not met, requirements not met, addresses that. That was. Right, we just wanna make sure that they have to slow down to make that turn. Okay. Yeah, because of the trail crossing and the two-way condition on the trail and that kind of stuff. Thanks. In terms of the heavy equipment areas, I guess we're gonna be parking the heavy equipment. A question about apparatus, will it support that? What I'm looking at is like 75 PSI, support 81,000 pounds and all weather surface as in you can maintain that in case of snowfall and everything. And the reason I bring that up is for you, able for you to be able to meet your 150 feet to all portions of the exterior of the 8,000 square foot, I guess that was that storage on the back left corner of it. In order to meet that, all of that heavy equipment surface has to meet that requirement for apparatus access. If for whatever reason, it doesn't meet the same 5 PSI, 81,000 pounds, I would have to see some sort of note indicating that that storage area is sprinkled so that you can get the increase of 450 feet from an apparatus access. Okay. And I think we were required to add a access here. I might have to work with you on if that's acceptable, but it would be paved or concrete to get back there as well. Gotcha. Yeah, in that case, you would have to, if you're making that your access, you got to provide a turnaround on that backside. Gotcha. Thank you. Anybody else? Applicant, you have anything? I'm good. I'm good. Okay. David, help me understand this note. Okay. Compliance with 3072? Section 1615B. Okay. Which, and then, I don't know if we need to expound on what that is, like in the document, but yeah. Okay. Section 16, zoning ordinance. Okay. Okay. I think I've got it. We'll try. Is that it? I think that was it. And then the removal of note number 20. Okay. So the motions for approval, right? Is that what the recommendation was for this plan? Yes. Okay. Motions for approval of PON MJDP-2664 Ramsey-Sullivan, phase three, lot three, with removal of note number 20 under requirements not met, and the addition of a note addressing section 1615B of the zoning ordinance regarding commercial entrances on industrial properties. So moved. Removal of addressing. Oh, removal of addressing for sign-offs. Okay. So moved. All in favor? Seeing none, opposed? All right. Thank you. Thank y'all. All right. Moving along, this is our first preliminary subdivision plan in conjunction with the zone change. This is MJDP-2660 Lindhurst Place, block D, lots 12 through 17, Hagerman Court subdivision, up campus. This is located at 224, 226, 228, 230 East High Street, 102 Hagerman Court, and 209, 211, 217, and 219 Stone Avenue. Pop over here real quick, and we'll come back. The purpose of this plan is to depict a two-story multifamily building in support of the requested zone change from medium density residential R4 and professional office P1 to a downtown frame business B2A zone. The subject property is located, this is East High Street here. The YMCA is across the street, and I didn't include very much of that. This is Hagerman Court here, and Stone Avenue here. So it kind of takes up the end of that block, and then down, it incorporates this lot, but not the one in the corner there. And then we'll go back. So we've got, again, Hagerman to plan north. This is East High Street here, and Stone Avenue here. So the subject property is this area, and then the end of the block. And they're depicting a multi-story with varying height roofs, multifamily structure with interior courtyards, and then some rooftop amenities. We'll see, we'll just kind of hang out there. Under requirements not met, number one, correct the title block to match the staff report. Number two, denote construction entrance location. Number three, add RLA stamp or ISA certified arborist name and certification number to the tree inventory map. Number four, depict a minimum eight-foot landscape buffer along the adjacent R4 properties to be used in conjunction with the six-foot privacy fence. Number five, provide some short-term bicycle parking spaces outside of the building within 20 feet of the lobby entrance. Number six, locate stormwater management on the development plan. There are no waivers requested at this time. Design considerations, number one, see all ASELA comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Number two, commercial driveway entrance shall comply with standard drawing 307-2. Number three, address the sanitary sewer capacity and confirm capacity. Number four, consider adding on-street parking to the left side of High Street. And again, this is something that we discussed with this as well in plan review, the need for a loading, unloading drop-off pickup area, or at least addressing that. Oh, da-da-da-da, let's see. Lost my place again. Number five, while there is parking on both Stone Avenue and Hagerman Court, is likely drop-offs will still choose to block traffic rather than park on those side streets. Number six, a sanitary sewer capacity application is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Under plan questions and concerns, number one, discuss potential drop-off locations along East High Street. Number two, discuss existing street trees. Number three, discuss height of building versus adjacent building heights. Number four, confirm that this complex will have a compactor. Number five, will the courtyard have pedestrian access? Number six, discuss the activation of High Street and a more urban open-space for gathering and traversing. Number seven, what is the proposal for stormwater management? Verify capacity and quality requirements are met. Number eight, check right-of-way for Hagerman Court against plat book one, page 124, April 26, 1906, city plat number 49. And then number nine, discuss the place builder criteria. We are recommending approval with the following conditions, provided the Urban County Council approves the zone change to B2A, and then sign-offs for engineering, traffic engineering, urban forester, open-space, environmental quality, and then finally to correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met herein. And with that, I'll open it up to committee for discussion. We'll do the environmental quality. Number six. All right, any other questions? Place builder? We don't mind about that either. Okay, all right. All right, applicants. Good morning, everyone. Brandon Gross here on behalf of the applicant. I also have Tyler Ammerman with Up Campus. This is their first project in Lexington, so I told him, come on up, introduce yourself, talk a couple minutes about his company, and then we can get into the meat of the discussion. Yeah, good morning. I'm Tyler Ammerman. As Brandon mentioned, we're based out of Chicago. Really just wanna say thank you for all your time for reviewing, providing the feedback, and look forward to working with you further as we progress the design. So, Jihad and I will kinda tag team a little bit. I'm Jihad Helain, he's our engineer. I'm gonna go through some of the easy ones. So, Eve, on your question, yes, there will be access to that courtyard, and we can clarify that on the plan to help you out. As to the compactor, it will be an internal compactor. Right now, the plan is for them to access the building off Hagerman Court, and we can make that, we can clarify that and work with you on that issue, which brings me to Vaughn's question, 3072, the commercial entrance. Yeah, we'll work through that and make sure that's clear on the plan. I think that handles most easy ones for me, and I'll kinda go through. So, one, two, three, cleanup, we'll make sure those are done. Four, that was our intent. We'll make sure the plan's more clearly labeled to take care of that one for you. The short-term parking, I'm gonna hold that for a second because I've got a whole conversation about activation, parking, bicycle parking, pedestrian safety, other things we'll go through. I discussed the entrance. Jahad will talk about sanitary capacity and stormwater. The off-street parking, I'm gonna hold that for a second. Same thing with number five. You'll see a theme here. There's lots of concerns about parking and bicycles and safety, and we understand that. And so, we're gonna work through all those items with everybody. The existing street trees, we're gonna, hopefully Eric's gonna have time to walk with us to the site after this meeting. We're gonna look at the trees. My recollection of those are pin oaks. Primarily, there may be a maple, but we'll look at those. I won't get on my soapbox about pin oaks, but we'll work through to see what can possibly be preserved and what makes more sense now because I am gonna get on my soapbox about pin oaks. So, pin oaks are generally short-lived trees, and they are very destructive, in my opinion, for infrastructure, both public and private. And so, I'm always opinion of sometimes it makes more sense to take it down now and replace it with a good species that will go ahead and start growing quicker than wait, but we'll talk with Eric about that and work through that. And then, to the extent trees do need to come down for this project, which we foresee, given the downtown nature of this project, we would see a significant loss of current existing trees. We're gonna work with Eric on what we can do to mitigate whether or not we donate trees in other locations or other things. We're completely open to try to add additional trees wherever we can somewhere else if we need to to make up for the loss of trees because we want tree canopy in Lexington just like everybody else. I think those are all kind of easy ones. So, the plan is once we leave here, we're gonna hopefully meet with Eric as part of that. I'm gonna take Tyler on a tour of Vine Street because we're gonna look at the town branch kind of trail elements and see if there's any of those elements that we could adopt up on High Street to activate that High Street area a little bit more. We don't have as much space as some of the Vine Street right away does, but we think we could adopt some of those elements. We're also gonna look at possibly whether or not we could add in potential rain garden there along the curb to separate the roadway from the pedestrians like they've done on Vine Street. So, that's part of today's tour. And then, to the extent that we come up with good ideas, we're gonna talk with Eve and Eric and Scott about how we can make those elements work to open up because we do want High Street to have it more activated. We are tweaking the design. We've been looking at the comments on Acela. So, we are currently tweaking how the lobby is gonna work. We're gonna probably move it closer to the corner of Stone and High and then have stretches go down both sides to more activate. We're looking at maybe doing the first level along High, having some recesses so that the building, you know, you have essentially your second floor, but then you may have eight or 10 feet on High Street that we could put tables and other things to kind of activate that area a little bit more, accommodate the bike parking, things of that nature. We're also, the plan had been to do on Hagerman Court. I saw your note on the plat. We missed that, but we're gonna work through it. I think our plan is we did, we showed what is existing there currently, maybe not what was on the 1907 plat, which appears not to be what is there today. We had somebody who- It's like 21 and a half feet. I think today it's like 16 or something. You know, it's not. So, our plan will be as part of this project, we're gonna need to do a consolidation plat if this gets approved. And so, we will likely need to address the cross-section of Hagerman. We can address the cross-section of Hagerman Court as part of that consolidation, but we can make a note now and show what we will plan. We had planned to have drop-offs on Stone, but it looks like there's some comments about maybe having a drop-off on High also, areas and some parking. And so, I think what we'd like to do is meet with you, David, and with Scott over the next week and figure out what you think would be best. Because our idea would be, is that way people could be dropped off on Stone or on High, potentially, and then walk into the building. We are gonna have kind of a larger delivery truck area off Hagerman. So, with the intent that those deliveries would go there, but as we've talked about today, Amazon parks where Amazon parks. And so, but we do plan on having temporary drop-off to where you guys think it makes the most sense. And we're also open to do bulb outs, extended landings at the intersections, other things like that to get you guys comfortable. I think rather than going through all those ideas today, it probably makes more sense for us to get on a call with the client so we can work through and the architect to figure out what you guys think is best on that angle. And so, I think that addresses most of the parking and bike, but I'm open to questions if you guys have any, and then if not, I can pass it on to Jahad to talk more about the engineering side of things. Yeah, I think, David, I'm okay with that on those things. Obviously, there might be other questions, but from the perspective of the notes we added, I think that would work to just have a discussion. Yeah, all your notes made sense to me. I've explained to the client, they make sense to the client, so I think we're already two steps ahead of where we need to be. And I think two or three phone calls, a couple of sharing of site plan changes, I think we can resolve that in the next few weeks. Okay, yeah. Just a quick general, just a general question for me here. Oh, yeah. Just to understand, is this one big building? It will be. Okay. It will be one big building, correct, with a courtyard in the center and then some rooftop amenities, that's correct. Is there a rendering on the zone change folder? There is. Okay. Yes, and those will be updated. Oh, go ahead. Yeah, they are renderings, but they're not of the proposed site, right? It's an example from another project of similar architectural style. There are two things, yeah. We have submitted the site plan type elements where it's a little bit more colored, but yeah, the rendering itself is from a typical project they have done that is similar to this. That will be updated once we, those renderings are not inexpensive. And so I told them, let's use an example for now because we're gonna need to make changes after we've talked with the various divisions. And then once we get those changes more solidified, we'll update the rendering and then have a more accurate rendering of the site as we get closer to the zone change. Public meeting is the plan. Oh, and then one last thing, the neighborhood meeting, I was supposed to have had it yesterday. My schedule did not work. So we'll be having that in September. So it will come after the committee meetings. I usually like to have it before those meetings, but unfortunately, due to my schedule, I was not able to make that happen. But I'll let you know, Daniel, when we schedule that. Okay, well, Jahad, you wanna talk about the engineering stormwater? This is Jahad Hallani with Vision Engineering on the sanitary sewers. So basically it would be similar to the other project, would be multiple of discharge pond connection to the main line. And we're working on the sanitary sewer capacity analysis. We'll submit it within the next couple of weeks. On the stormwater, so there is 30 inch lines that run parallel to the property. And from water quality would be prefabricated devices, storm scepters. And on stormwater, we are working on a drench study to see if there's any need to upsize any pipe to kind of get the capacity or the existing infrastructure is able to carry the capacity. Well, it's not just that. It's also the fact that you're taking away eight lots that are only partially impervious to a massive change in impervious cover. So that's a huge change in watershed and land cover use. So just, it's not just about downstream capacity, it's making sure that you meet the executive summary per the stormwater manual. Sure, yeah. One other thing, has there been any kind of study on the new flow, how it will affect the existing infrastructure we got on the sanitary side? We have, when we did the one on Maxwell and Hagerman, the other side of Maxwell, we did sanitary sewer capacity analysis on the existing line. And I know there was some, another student housing has been done. So that's what we are, on this one, we are taking whatever these two projects, in addition to that one. You also have to take a look at, John, over here. You also have to take a look at all the other developments that have come in since that time. There's been a lot coming in, and what this is going to ultimately is gonna be that back alley area. So you're gonna have to study all the way down to Vine Street on that. To Vine Street? To at least, down to the trunk on Vine Street. Okay, so all the way to the trunk line? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Thank you, appreciate it. Appreciate your time. Did they address waste management today? Did they discuss the compactor? Or? Yeah, there's a compactor. Okay, okay, I didn't know if they, okay. Yes, it's on Hager Mitting Court. Okay, okay. Sorry, I missed that. And then was there a change at the beginning of this? Did you mention some? No, but. anything on this one? All right, staff recommendations approval. So the motions for approval of PLN-MJDP-2660, Lynnhurst Place, Block D, Lots 12 through 17, Hagerman Court, subdivision of campus, with the removal of environmental quality sign-offs. So moved. All in favor? Anyone opposed? All right, motion passes. Okay, we're moving down the agenda. This is our next item change. MJDP-2661, Berrycrest, Lots 3 through 13, Regency Holdings 3. Okay, this is the corner of Nicholasville Road in Pasadena and then this is Normandy Lane that is over here by the Kroger's. So they're proposing to show the extension of Norman Lane out to Pasadena. They're in for a zone change to rezone the property to B1 on the rear portion here because it's single family for them to have the extension of Norman Lane. What they're developing is up here at the front they're putting in a coffee shop with drive-through but it's not accessing off of Nicholasville Road, it's going to access off of Norman Lane. So that is why they're here for the proposal of the zone change request. This property over here is all part of it. They're rezoning this as B1 and they're showing a proposed structure here in the center with parking in the front and parking in the rear between Pasadena and also then between the existing shopping center where the Kroger's store is. So with that the requirements not met are correct plan title to match staff report, addition of record plat information, to know location of construction access for vehicle access, clarifying that number 16 the property one has pedestrian access only to Nicholasville Road, dimension driveway access to property one, to note height the relocated retaining wall. They've got a retaining wall on here and they don't have the height on it. Location of the double dumpster enclosure will not work. After speaking with Scott and waste management, this double dumpster location is not going to work for their trucks for turnaround and so you're going to need to talk with Scott about the better way to do that. Excuse me, revise open space exhibit to reflect correcting zoning requirements, dimension all pedestrian crossings, raising of all cross crossings greater than 24 feet and ensure that they're perpendicular to the flow of traffic, provide an eight-foot landscape buffer on the southern boundary of track one, locate stormwater management on the development plan, correct the bb cross section and waiver note to Norman Lane, a conditional use permit will be required for the drive-through on track one. This is in the b1 zone. So for the drive-through on the property, denote all access points shall be built as commercial access points and shall not be at grade with the new roadway, proposed commercial entrances shall conform to the LFUC standard drawing 3072 and must meet fire code or LFUCG division of fire standards. Waivers necessary, access spacing requirements, vehicle use area on a corner lot, those are two and we have waiver deadline is this Friday for design considerations, see all satellite comments by the division of engineering, note all existing entrances on Pasadena shall be removed and sidewalk and curbs will be established. This used to be all residential down through here now they're Pasadena all was residential and so they're going to have to remove the residential driveways on the property. Plain questions or concerns, discuss the need for front yard variance for property one, Nicholas Hill Road to be resolved at the time of the final development plan, verify the statistics box on the tree protection plan is for the significant trees, require vehicular use area interior landscaping or zone-to-zone screening is not included as vegetated open space, what is the proposal for the stormwater management, address sanitary sewer capacity and confirm existing system has capacity, discuss cross-section as a private street and its location, is this development taking a piece of regency development next to 2395 Nicholasville, then discuss place by criteria, the staff recommends approval with the following, provide the urban county council approves the zone change to be one, division of engineering, traffic engineering, urban forester, open space, department of environmental quality and then correct all note deficiencies as listed as requirements not met hereon. I will open it to the committee to see if there's any other comments or questions or if anybody can be removed from this list. If not, applicant. Good morning, Brad Boaz with CMW. Some questions I have, I guess, on the dumpster guys got in waste management, it's, I guess, it's the turning movement coming from Pasadena, is that the concern or backing up to where we have a crosswalk? It's, excuse me, camera fog with waste management, it's that but also the backing up into traffic, it's just not a safe location for that dumpster, especially with the flow of traffic. Yeah, well, yeah, with the circular movement, I guess there may not be a spot period that doesn't impact that some way, so I guess we'll have to sit down with you and Scott, figure out if there's a more appropriate location for that. On the retaining wall, there is a retaining wall there, and we aren't sure if we're gonna be able to keep that in place or if we need to remove and replace that with something different. So we'll try to get more information and show you guys what the ultimate proposal is. There is a modular block retaining wall there now. We are asking for a variance on the eight-foot landscape buffer on the southern side here. The property line and what is built don't really align. There's a retaining wall on the back side of the mattress firm, and then asphalt all the way to the face of that wall. Well, a lot of that is on the mattress firm property, even though it's the driveway for what was the PRAS building prior. So we are gonna, we've talked to the property owner and we think they'll be okay with us removing that asphalt and making it green space. However, the current offset back there from the road to the property line is five feet, seven inches. And so we've asked for a variance, some relief there on to reduce it down from the eight foot down there to what we can, what we show as the offset. We will locate stormwater management on the plan. Both lots would have underground detention chamber system. And then let's see, traffic engineering on access points. Is that just meaning there's a, make sure that was what you're talking about. The cross section, you know, the issue is on the cross section for Norman. We show it as a 50 foot. Yep. Oh, it says item 12. Oh, there's a, it's a, you call it normal lane somewhere on the plan. So it's a typo. Okay. I can do that. So we'll make it Norman. And yeah, so we have updated our, with our zone change request, the conditional use for the coffee shop on the B1s. We'll see how that folds in with your all schedule. And if it can be part of what we're going through now, we have to kind of take a step back. Anything on requirements I met, we should discuss while I'm up here. Make sure I understand what the questions are. On the private street that probably shouldn't been labeled as private street up here, this driveway, that's just connecting this driveway into the Regency center driveway. So the person that is developed, the developer of this project owns the Regency center. And so there shouldn't be any issues with us obtaining access to the Regency center. In addition to, yes, we are showing this property line shifting in order to, you know, to be able to be able to obtaining access to the Regency center. In addition to, yes, we are showing this property line shifting in order to put it in the middle between the existing parking lot behind the IHOP and the McAllister's and the coffee shop. So that zone B6, B5P or B6P. And so I don't believe that needs his own change, but we are proposing that line to shift so we can center that on the driveways. And that is a part of our variance request is to reduce that down. I think it's seven feet or eight feet, nine inches here and seven feet, five inches here, curb to curb. And so that's a request we're making from the planning group. Okay. Nick, did I miss anything? I'll make a quick comment just for your design when you get into more of the engineering side of things. On Pasadena, I believe it is, we've got a kind of a storm network there on that street that kind of turns up where your proposed roadway extension is. And I think there's a ditch line there now. So that's going to have to be kind of redesigned a little bit for your storm system and however you want to do that. I mean, I assume the road will be separate from your two sites, stormwater management, but just keep that in mind as you get into it. It's a little bit tricky. Yeah, it doesn't outfall in our line. I know the mattress firm, it does outfall. We'll pick that up. Okie dokie. Anybody else have anything? All right. Do you have anything else? I don't believe so. Okay. Thank you all. All right. So motion is for approval of PLN-MJDP-2661, Berry Crest, Lots 3 through 13. So moved. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Motion passes. Okay. Next plan is MJDP-2663, Fitzgerald and Fuller and others property, Oak Park and Melrose, Turner Property and Meadowthorpe Community Business Center, Turner Commons. So this zone change in this development plan is to incorporate new parcels that have been purchased adjacent to the existing Turner Commons. So you all are probably familiar with the currently ongoing Turner Commons project. This development is, or this next addition is this portion here and they're requesting a zone change from B1 and B4 to a PUD3, which is what the remainder of the development is currently zoned. So again, this is our kind of subject portion of the ongoing development. So we've got West Main Street out here with North Forbes here and then the private drive into Turner Commons and then the Turner Commons Way comes down the long portion of the property. This kind of shows the aerial. So this is the existing Turner Commons development and then again in green, this is showing what's being added with this zone change and development plan. This was the Stuttgart Motors here. They've purchased that parcel and the adjacent parcel or two parcels, I believe. So let me go back to the kind of the zoom in there. So under requirements not met, number one, denote no building permit shall be issued unless until final development plan is certified by the Secretary of the Planning Commission. Number two, depict 20-foot yard along West Main Street. Number three, denote open space and tree canopy calculations. Number four, surface parking is not a principle. Permitted use new lots must be configured so parking is a permitted use. That could be a consolidation or just lot line adjustments if necessary. Let's see. Number five, remove VUA and front yard of proposed corner lot. Number six, depict pedestrian connections. Number seven, dimension all existing and proposed driveways and walkways. Number eight, depict VUA perimeter buffer. Number nine, depict interior landscaping for VUA. Number 10, correct title block to match the staff report. Number 11, depict contour lines. Number 12, provide lighting plan that conforms with Article 30 of the zoning ordinance. Number 13, correct all references of South Main Street to West Main Street in purpose of amendment. Number 14, depict tree protection areas, if any, on development plan. Number 15, increase legibility of open space exhibit with colors and or patterns to designate types of open space. And number 16, a minimum of 10 percent of parcel must be usable open space. And then there is a waiver requested for the reduction of the yard buffer and a reduction of the VUA buffer screening. Then under design considerations, number one, see all ASELA comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Plan questions and concerns, discuss the place builder criteria, and then we are recommending postponement. There's questions regarding conformance with Article 16, 18, and 22C-5 of the zoning ordinance. If the plan is approved, provided the Urban County Council approves the zone change to PUD3 and then the sign-offs for engineering, traffic engineering, urban forester, open space, environmental quality, and then to correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met herein. And with that, I'll open it up to the committee for discussion, questions, comments, queries. Nothing from the committee? Okay. Applicant? Good morning. I'm Brian Ward with Palmer Engineering and I'm going to talk a few of the items on the staff report and then also a couple items on the ASELA comments. First, I'd like to speak on item number three, the tree canopy calculations. We have those on the open space exhibit. I presume you just want to copy them over onto the development plan? Correct? Okay. Yes, that'd be great. Great. Number four, yeah, we'll look at the consolidating some of those lots and shifting some parcels around to make that work. The VUA in the front yard of the proposed corner lot. I want to speak a little about that. I presume that's this area right here. Existing along this road, we have five entrances. We're consolidating those down to two to improve traffic and make it work. The waiver was requested for that area right there that was listed and mentioned here earlier. If we can't get that waiver for access for the old Stuhlgard building, then we will need to put or keep one of those existing entrances. So, rather than two, we'll need three in that area for access for the Stuhlgard building. That's where we are. We'll see how that waiver works out and then go from there. Number nine, I presume the same. We'll copy the interior landscaping for the VUA from the landscaping exhibits over onto the development plan. And 15 and 16 on the open space exhibits, we'll clean that up to where it's more identifiable and the different uses for that. And we discussed internally that we'll take the open space for the interior we'll take the open space for the entire development plan, not just the new parcels. So, that might help you all. That's what we've shown, I think. Yeah, thank you. Moving on to some of the Acela comments. Traffic had a comment on the grade or steepness of this cross connection with the service road here. We run great on that. It'll be about 11 and a half to 12 percent. That's about where that's going to run and that will allow a three and a half percent from Main Street up. We don't have to have that connection, but it just is good for overall traffic movement and planning. We felt it was a benefit. Consider traffic calming in the straight section of the new parking lot. We'll look at that. Yeah, I was just imagining somebody maybe in traffic thinking, living back that way, saying, you know, if you go this way, 40 miles an hour, you can get somewhere. I don't know. It's just something to think about. I thought the same thing when I seen the comment. I'm going to talk a little bit about stormwater management. We have various stormwater management elements throughout the site, including some water quality basins down here. We also have existing impervious area that we'll be working with on the new parcels. We'll, and we have some excess capacity in our water quality on the existing development. Our plan is to utilize that and supplement with pervious pavers, water quality units, whatever we need to meet the requirements and then have subsurface from those to work their way down to the proposed pond area. Plan questions or concerns? Has note 18 been addressed in terms of traffic payment? I'll need to confirm that and get back with everyone. I presume if it has been made, we'll probably remove that note from the plan because that requirement will have been met. And the same for note 15. I believe those gates are up, but I'll confirm that as well. In terms of the timing of the entrances, our anticipation is this one, our anticipation is this one will be as soon as possible. We have an existing transportation cabinet permit with District 7 for the existing entrance widening. We'll need to modify that permit to include the shift and the aligning of these two roads here. And as soon as that's in place, it will be permitting that entrance and moving forward with construction on that. The rest of those entrances as far as the removals and improving this entrance here and this service road connection, I would anticipate that in the next year or so or maybe longer. Let's see, sanitary sewer capacity. I'll double check it, but we're not adding any buildings, so it should be pretty well up to date since all we're adding is parking with this addition because the Stuegart building is already in the plan. It's just being rezoned as part of this plan. I'll hit something there. What is it? There we go. I'll get it here. Okay, I'm heading back. All right, here you go. You can find it. Other than that, that's really the last comment I have. So, any questions you have? Yeah, the existing, the access off of Main Street into that parking lot will need a pedestrian connection out to that public right-of-way as well. You're talking about right here? Where you were discussing the grades. No, yeah, that one. And then on the, I know you're getting a waiver for that, or looking to get a waiver for that piece of roadway that's directly adjacent to that. Is that directly adjacent to the sidewalk? How's that going to, I mean, I'm just, you know, thinking about what that looks like. Yeah, it's tight. You know, it's tight and it's a narrow sidewalk already, and I mean, you know. And we can, I can narrow this down some and put some type of green between the sidewalks. Yeah, whatever you can do, I think, to just make it more usable space, just given the, you know, a six-inch drop, and then Main Street can have some higher speeds on it. So, it really, you know, really narrows that usable space. And then we also have, I just also had a comment about making sure all of the sidewalks kind of connect internally. There's some ends and begins that don't really match up, and you know, we can narrow that down. There's some ends and begins that don't really match up, and trying to get your crossings at 90 degrees where you can, those, you know, ones that aren't at 90 degrees tend to be more problematic. And so, anything you can do to clean those up would be helpful, I think. Okay. Anything else? Thank you. All right. All right. Anybody have anything else? Okay. So, it's past recommendations for postponement. So, motions for postponement of PLN-MJDP-2663, Fitzgerald and Fuller at all property, Oak Park and Melrose-Turner property, and Meadowthorpe Community Business Center. So moved. Second. All in favor? Anyone opposed? The motion passes. Okay. I think we've got a few more things left to some, just our two revisions, and then two, what are the, these two? We got three revisions. Well, let's move forward. So, this is for MJDP-2622 Bryant property. We just got this development plan signed last Friday. So, you'll see that we don't have a revised staff report for this, because we just, and I was out of town, so, and I didn't receive revised prints to look at. The last set of prints that I received were back in June. And so, that was several months ago. And so, I did not look at those, because at the same time, we were waiting for the preliminary to be signed. So, this is what happens when you have two plans filed at the same time. Things tend to overlap and don't get reviewed correctly. So, at this current time, with this plan, we still have a recommendation of a postponement, because we did not receive revised plans that match the development plan that was just, the preliminary development plan that was just signed. So, the prints that we have are for what, this is not the correct plan, but this is what the preliminary development plan that they, looks just like the one that just got signed. This is what they had listed and posted into Acela, but I had not reviewed prior to this meeting. So, at this time, I'm not sure if there are other conditions that do not meet from what they presented to us in June, if this matches what was signed on Friday of this past week. So, at this current time, I know they were hoping to move this forward with an approval, but not reviewing a revised plan and having revised conditions at this time. I'm not quite sure how to move this forward. So, I don't know if that makes sense. That's why you have a list of a pink sheet to show some of the requirements not met, and then the sign-offs that are required. But as I said, we didn't, they filed it in June. We didn't receive something after it was signed to make a revision from. So, with that, I'll open it to you. I'll see if there's any other comments. I don't know. And you said this is the Bryant property we're talking about? Yes, this is MJDP 2622 Bryant property. Right. Like I said, they, we just had this signed on Friday. This past week, so. The preliminary. The preliminary subdivision, got it. Preliminary development plan was just signed on Friday. And the plans that they gave us were back in June. So, I don't know that they match what they just got signed. Right. We haven't had time to review this plan against the old plans. Does that make sense? Okay. Gio, do you want to speak to that? Yes. Good morning. I apologize we are in this position because we have a client pressuring us. They want to start working before the, before the construction season hit and the winter hit. So, the final development, the preliminary development plan gets certified on, on Friday, as Sharon mentioned. And the final is, is exactly the same as the preliminary development plan. So, that's, that's the intent is to be exactly nothing changed, no change, nothing. So, if it's possible for us to kind of has a path forward, so we can get certification of the final development plan. And which is everybody's going to have the chance to review and comments on. It's not like if you guys tell us, hey, let's move on. We are going to certify the plan immediately. So, still has to be reviewed by every entity. If, if you guys are okay with that, that will. Can address Sharon concerns that she did not review it. We'll have plenty of time to review it. And plus, our client does not feel like he has been pushed a month. And then he start construction in the winter and fighting, fighting the winter season. Are there any substantial differences like, as far as the depiction, what's depicted on the plane from the preliminary? I'm not sure about this 1 exactly, but I know what our intent is exactly as a preliminary development plan. I don't know if this drawing is the same to be honest with you. I don't see very well, but definitely it was the most current 1 posted in a cell and. Under the final development plan. But as I said, I hadn't had a chance to look at this compared to the 1 that was signed on Friday. But this looks similar because they did change. The building layout from the previous, because they had connection between the 2 lots on the previous 1. And this 1 showing where they don't have that connection. Because they had changed some to meet the preliminary development plan. It looks similar. I just haven't had a chance to review it, but everybody's a sign off. So, I'm going to allow you all to make that decision. Yes, I think that's it. I agree with you, Sharon. That's it because based on our meeting with Eric about protecting the trees and other stuff, we kind of reworked the parking in this area to protect the trees. And also, we eliminated that connection over here. And that's the pool and the clubhouse. So, this is matching the preliminary development plan. You reduced the number of dwelling units so that you didn't, you only had to have 1 access point to the property. Correct. For the fire department. Because it was less than 100. Correct. It's 96 or something. From my standpoint, the contention of the plan was the conversion of the access easement to a public street. So, if your DP will reflect what was recorded, and then you want to come back later. But you can't build off of a public street. Is that what the condition or problem was? I'm thinking they were trying to, this was a private access easement, and they were supposed to dedicate this to a public street. I'm not sure if that's been done. I know we had the plan go through the process, but have you all had that dedicated yet? Jehan? Have you completed? We have the plan. We have the MILR submitted. I don't know if it has been signed or not yet. Okay. We'll have to look and see if that's been... I mean, I can't speak for anybody else in my section. I'll have to check and see if they received what we needed. But the main concern was stormwater, how that was going to be done. We reworked the stormwater basically to go along the front and connect to avoid the underground detention basin. And that was going to be constructed with the apartments, which would be after the final development plan certification. So if you were dedicating, did they submit a major subdivision plan for the dedication of the street and then would need a waiver of substantial completion of the stormwater? Okay. Well, filing deadline's Friday. So, I mean, I guess they could ask for a waiver. And... They would have to ask for a waiver and go in front of the PC. And at this time, they can be working on getting this plan. If we recommended approval, they could ask for a waiver. And then we'd have to denote that information on this DP before it'd be certified that they asked for a waiver. They asked for a waiver of substantial completion. So that they could then... So then the street would be public and then this plan could move forward as you're intending it to. But it seems like the plat and dedication of the public street might be the holdup right now. Yeah. So, but the plat can be... The... So if the plat gets recorded, so without the street being there, I mean, the street's already built. It is there. It's only dedication. So it's not like we have to build a new street. We need, would need whatever we need for the stormwater to be public, not private. Yes. And then my understanding is that the storm line has to be constructed at the same time of the apartment. Yes. So what I'm thinking is you need a waiver of substantial completion to complete the stormwater for the public street. Okay. That would allow you to provide the surety for the storm, record the public street, build the apartment. Yes, ma'am. Makes sense now. So basically, we'd have to file for a waiver by Friday of... If you submitted the major subdivision plan for the road, I don't know if you have or not. I don't know if they... I know they have. They have a final record plan at this time. I believe that's running, but I'm not sure that it's been recorded. Yeah, that might be the one that would need the waiver on is... Right. So if you file for the waiver, you... If we recommend approval today and you file for the waiver, we'll have to denote the waiver information on this development plan. And that way, for substantial completion, that way then you can get the record plaque recorded for the street and start your... Construction. Construction because you'll have a waiver and then you can start your construction on your development plan. Is that correct? That sounds right. I think if the plaque is recorded, then I don't have any issues with the plan. So does... So that would get us to approval today? That gives you time to review? You understand what you need to do? Yes, sir. We need to file sound like waiver by Friday for the plan. On the plan, yeah. Substantial completion and the stormwater relocation. Jihad, for the new development on the... Apartment. Eastern side. Yeah, the apartment side. Did I hear you correctly earlier say that the stormwater from that is also going into the underwater detention? No, sir. No, no. We're talking about what Von, she's asking. Since we are turning this from private to public, she does not want the stormwater. Public stormwater to go to private underground detention. Right. The detention basin for the apartment is going to be in that location. So all of the stormwater for the apartments is going to the rear? Correct. Yes, sir. Jihad, obviously, we worked a lot on the trees and I'm happy with that. I was just looking at this latest plan and just make sure that you have tree protection fence listed in the legend, but I don't see it on the plan. So just make sure that that's... Okay. It should make sure that's denoted. Yes, sir. And then my only other thought is, and probably work with Scott to when we get to this point, but that pedestrian connection to the Brighton Trail is awfully close to that amazing hickory tree right there in the corner. And I just want to make sure that there's no damaging of that root zone when that goes in. Yeah, but the trail, I believe it's... It's... It's constructed. So we only going to tie to it. We can dictate where to tie to. So it does not... Yeah, I'm just saying, let's make sure to keep me in the loop on that so that we're not destroying the things that we're protecting. Sure. But just to go back on the plan and correct me, Sharon, my memory is not the best anymore, but the plan has been in front of the planning commission. And... No, but also was the planning commission... It was for the sidewalk, but not... For the sidewalk, but not substantial completion. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Because you had to ask for a waiver because you didn't put a sidewalk on one side of the street. Yes. Yes. Because there is a gas line. If you recall, there's a gas line running here plus there's a different grade. And then there's a different grade on it that was creating a problem for it. So we could ask for substantial completion on that, take it back in front of the planning commission. And then that way you can get your plat recorded and then... Work on the construction plans. Work on the construction. Makes sense. Just a curious question on the... Is that new tree planting on like the west side? And is it impeding over top of the existing sanitary lines that's there? No, sir. It should not be because the dash line is a sanitary easement, I believe. The previous plan had planting shown above the sanitary easement and that's been changed in this plan. Correct. Thank you. You might... This plan here shows the name Public Street, but you might go ahead and put Bryan Court there so everybody knows what that really is. You've got the addresses on the building. So each building has its own address. 3100 Bryan Court on them, but you might... Where it says Public Street, you might go ahead and put Bryan Court. Somebody knows what that is. And I need you to swap buildings one and two. On this plan, you've got the first building we come to. It's got a two on it. The next building's got a one. And then you got three and four. So just swap the one and two designation on this. Sure. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? So it sounds like we have a path forward for approval. Right. Okay. So the motion is for approval of PLN-MJDP-2622 Bryant Property with an amendment to note number eight, Open Space Planner's Approval of the Treatment of Open Space. So moved. All in favor? Anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes. Okay, the next plan is we have revisions MJDP-2650 Givens Property, Lotta 8, Citation Point. This was postponed because of them needing to go to the Royal Springs Aquifer for review. This is the car wash on the Givens property. We're located at the corner of Georgetown and Citation. There's been a car wash on this property several times, but each time, whoever the car wash is, they could do a different design. So therefore, they had to go back in front of the Royal Springs for this. So they did go back in front of the Royal Springs and submit a revised plan. So you can see the requirements not met. Upload open space exhibit to Acela. Provide dumpster enclosures and concrete pad specifications. Design considerations, see Acela for Division of Engineering. Verify stormwater management capacity and quality requirements. And then staff recommends approval with the engineering traffic, landscape addressing, urban forester, environmental quality, bike and ped, open space, division fire, division waste management, division water quality, United States Postal Service, and correct all note deficiencies requested, required with Heron. So I'm going to open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions or if anyone can be removed from this list. Actually, I think you can take the addressing off this. We'll, we'll pick it up again during construction. Okay, thank you, sir. Okay, if not, applicant. Okay. Hello, Chris Mitchell, Palmer Engineering. Regarding two comments, one about the open space exhibit, I thought I'd uploaded that on Acela. Is there comments on that or did we, was that just missed? I saw it was uploaded last week and I'm just now looking at it. Okay. And the only thing I can see is it looks good. I just want to make sure that there's no overlap between the required landscaping and buffering and open space. We separated the internal and perimeter landscaping from that. There might be one area I have a question on, but I'll reach out to you. Yeah, that's fine. That'd be good. Okay, just make sure you saw that. Thank you. I'll do that today. And it was, I didn't have the dumpster enclosure uploaded. I did that today. So take a look at that and let me know what you think. Okay. But if anybody else has any questions, I'm happy to answer them. Make sure your bike parking won't be across the sidewalk. The way it's shown there, if somebody's using that rack, the bike would hang out over the sidewalk. So we just try to make sure you provide the space needed for the actual bike, which is like 84 inches from front to back. Yeah, I'll take a look at that and make the change. And then it looks like the pedestrian access is kind of way around and there's another vehicular access up front. It needs to be more direct than that. The reason being is people aren't really going, more than likely are going to be coming from a different direction. Just walk in that access. So if you can provide a direct connection in off of that roadway, that would be better prior to that. From the actual access drive? Either from the access drive or prior to it. Well, whatever works best for you. My concern was the grade. It's pretty steep. And I was just looking for something that was more pedestrian friendly. So that's why I chose the direction I had it. I can provide one there, but it's just going to be steeper than typical. I would like to see for pedestrians, but I can add that if you want. Is it greater than 8%, 1 in 12? Is there any internal office area? Is that in the building at all or is it all mechanical? I think there's some office, sitting area or office space on the left-hand side of the building where those doorways are shown. I'm not sure there's a practical way to go to that other entrance and then get everybody. Because if you're going to be walking to the, you're not going to obviously going to get yourself washed. So you're going to be going to the office. What I'm meaning, what I'm saying is there's no drive aisle or access out in that area. Drive aisle or access out in that area where it says 40-foot utility easement. And there's some stormwater stuff up there. You can just make a connection in there would probably be preferable. If the grades aren't too crazy. We can talk about it. I mean, if you need to look at it, see what you can do. And if you can't make it happen, we can work with this. I guess what I was trying to do is provide access to the office space, which is shown in that back area. From the left side up. And then I chose the other one going towards, I guess on the right side next to the, there's a striped area on the far side near the dumpster enclosure. I chose that because if I could work in the grade and have something that is somewhat ADA compliant. I mean, it's, I think it is actually ADA compliant. I just was not wanting, I was trying to avoid a non-ADA compliant sidewalk to connect. Okay. So I think, I think I see what you're talking about. Is yeah, maybe that you've provided. I just couldn't, I just didn't see it. Yeah. Okay. It sort of loops and comes down and ties into existing. Okay. Yes. Then that's fine. That, that works perfectly. I didn't see that connection. That's what I was alluding to. Yeah. No problem. Thanks. All right. Thanks. Anybody else? All right. Anything else? Nope, that's all. Perfect. Thank you. Motions for approval of PLN-MJDP 2650, Givens Property, Lot 8. So moved. Remove addressing. Oh, okay. Motions for approval of PLN-MJDP 2650, Givens Property, Lot 8 with the removal of sign off of number four addressing. So moved. All in favor? Anyone opposed? All right. All right. We got one more. MJDP 2654, Patchen Wilkes Unit 2, Lot 10. This one, this one was heard last month at Tech, but, but, but this is the final one because the preliminary hadn't been certified. It was postponed to this month. They have made a couple small changes. Again, this is the multifamily development that's proposed at Patchen Wilkes. This is the Kroger site here. We have Charleston Drive and then Patchen Wilkes Drive here. So under requirements not met, number one, provide lighting plan that complies with Article 30. Number two, list interior vehicular, vehicular use area tree canopy required and provided. Number three, remove the vegetative areas past the retaining wall and in the floodplain from the open space exhibit. Number four, adjust the vegetative buffer width. Is, I think that's been addressed, right? Is that one of the chain, the, the vegetative buffer width? I think I just didn't mark it off because I wasn't, I want to make sure that that was all, that's what we worked through. So we can remove four. So, and then number five, correct commission certification. I can't remember exactly what the correction is, but I think maybe it was just carry over from something else, but we can, whatever the right one is, put that on there. Design considerations, see all ASELA comments provided by the Division of Engineering. Plan questions and concerns. Number one, confirm location. We'll have a compactor and no other dumpsters. And then we're recommending approval with the sign offs for engineering traffic, engineering, landscaping, addressing, urban forest, or environmental quality, bike pit, open space, fire, waste management, water quality, postal service, and then to correct all noted deficiencies listed as requirements not met. And with that, I'll turn it over to the committee. Is there anybody that can be removed or anybody have any questions or? Okay. Rory Caley with EA Partners. Requirements not met. Eve, I believe we handled this last month, discussed it. If we can confirm that I've met that, that would be great. And then the applicants working with their own, their out of state. So they got their own civil and I believe they've turned in the lighting plan to you. I just want to make sure you, you know, they've submitted that and then we'll. I can't remember if I've looked at it since the initial review. Okay. They're submitting it kind of separate from me. So I just want to make sure you saw it for this plan. I can't remember for sure. I'll check. All right. When I get back up there. And I'll fix the certification. Got a couple of typos to it. And yeah, that's it. I'll get the, I'll get them to confirm in writing about the dumpster and the compactor. Did I send you the building numbers? I don't remember. No, I haven't put those on yet. I just got the whatever the address is for the whole property. Yeah, we okay. Yeah, we need those. I'm older than dirt, so I can't tell you for sure. Also, make sure you put the address on this one because I don't, I don't see it on this one where we talked about it on the preliminary. Okay. And Rory, I think we talked about the, the mid-block crossing, depicting how that's constructed. Yes, calling it out as it is called out. Yeah, you can see I got lead lines in there, but they didn't make it. So just make sure that's on there and then the, the, the note on the bike parking requirements and all that stuff will need to be on here as well. Yeah, they're giving me a drawing from their architects of what they want. Okay. As far as trash, are you having compactors or dumpsters? Should be just the one compactor and I'll make sure that there's nothing else going in that. Perfect, thank you. All right, anybody else? Rory, you good? I'm good. All right, the motions for approval of PLN MJDP 2654, Patchant Wilkes Unit 2, Lot 10, with the removal of note number 4 under requirements not met, just vegetative buffer width. So moved. Second. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. Is that everything? Okay, so I guess we're adjourned. Thank you.