The listeners get to freely talk And no one will ever turn up the rages again I'm looking at that I'm looking at that Thank you. We'll be right back. I'm here, I roll on the sofa, I roll on the floor And then we get hungry and think of my car It would be a shame for my folks Like us to have to go walking around So if you're a little bit like you make sure That I'll keep that one out of touch around So they know that you've got to get everybody into your soul. Come back to your DVDs for this is our year. And everybody will say that was great and big small, a place to hang. I'll talk to you later because this is our year. And then even I'm lonely. Oh, yes, I'm so lonely. I know that I'm lonely because this is our year. But I'm not comfortable with the public people internet so I can stay connected to you because this is our year. It would be a shame for good folks like us to have to go and walk around. So we build a robot to make sure that our feet never ever touch the ground. It would be a shame for good folks like us to have to go and walk around. So we build a robot to make sure that our feet never ever touch the ground. Good afternoon. Welcome to the March 26th meeting of the Planning Commission. And at this time, we'll ask for approval of the minutes. We have the minutes of the February 26, 2009 meeting. I'll ask the Commission if there are any corrections, clarifications, amendments, please do so at this time. Or is there a motion for acceptance? Mr. Chairman, I'll move for approval of the February 26, 2009 minutes as written. I have a motion and a second for acceptance of the minutes. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. All opposed, please say no. Motion carries. Thank you. At this time we'll entertain any requests for postponements or withdrawal. At this time, any requests for postponements or withdrawal? Okay, thank you. Seeing none, we'll entertain the first application and we'll give the staff a moment to get set up. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Immons. Yes, sir. It's been a while since I've been up at the podium. So I would like to start off with our first zone change today. It appears on page one of the agenda. It's MAR 2008-31, the trustees of the First United Methodist Church of Lexington, Kentucky. It's a zone change for a property located at 200 West High Street, a portion of that property, 318 South Mill Street, and 323 and 327 South Upper Street. This is a zone change application from both an R2 and an R4 zones, that's our two-family residential and our high-density apartment zone, to our B2B zone, which is our downtown center business zone. Before I get started, just a little bit of housekeeping. I'm going to ask Cheryl to pass out just a copy of the B2B zone. We'll just pass that around in case you had any questions. I don't plan on referring to it. And we've received about 10 letters of neighborhood opposition. I've got two copies of that all circulate around. Three of those letters are from neighborhood associations, two of them from boards, and about five of them from individuals. As I mentioned, just go through a quick PowerPoint presentation for you. This is, as I mentioned, zone change for the First United Methodist Church property. Looking at the subject property, it has founded actually four different properties. Am I on? Now I'm on. And as the properties come into focus here, you can see the church itself. I believe most people are familiar with this site. The main part of the church fronts along High Street. There are two properties along South Upper Street that are residential in nature. And then along South Mill Street, there's Rokeby Hall, which is owned by the church and used for church offices and church uses. At the time that our aerial photographs were taken, Rokeby Hall still has had an addition on there since the aerial photographs have been taken. So those don't show up in any of my photographs. The existing zoning for the site, the main part of the church property actually has three different zones on it. And there's B2B zoning along the front. That part of the property is not being requested for a zone change. There's a strip of R4 in the middle of the property. And then R2 zoning that extends back towards the South Hill Neighborhood Association area. The 2007 comprehensive plan recommends downtown master plan uses as indicated by the Great Big Purple. Zooming out just a little bit, you can see it's a little bit in from the edge of there. It covers the historic South Hill neighborhood, comes down through here, and it's also recommended for downtown master plan, also some residential uses. I wanted to talk a little bit about the downtown master plan for this property. There we go. Recommendation one of the comprehensive plan would be to kind of start categorizing our downtown area, along with so that you had the downtown core, as indicated in the red, and then the mixed-use corridors that would follow up in through here. The subject property does fall within one of these mixed-use corridors as it's recommended, and then it's got recommended for the residential neighborhoods surrounded in through there. It kind of sets up a framework for how downtown should be thought of. In particular for this precinct, the subject property would be located right up here. We've got High Street, Upper, and Mill. And for the audience, that's High Street, Upper, and Mill down and through there. You can see that in this area that the downtown master plan did recommend some amount of infill and redevelopment for the subject property. The red buildings are proposed infill buildings. We've got Mack Sally as it comes up along through here. And this area that's basically a parking lot you can see on the proposed development plan is the area that the applicants are wishing to expand their fellowship hall. I did come up with a few quotes out of the downtown master plan that I wanted to highlight that I thought were particularly important. whenever the infill and redevelopment plan looked at the entire downtown area they focused on the infill not so much the redevelopment aspects of that so they looked for all of the vacant and properties that they felt were underutilized and they showed new infill buildings in there now the downtown master plan focuses on residential infill in these areas but it's not necessarily limited to just that. Also I thought a very important part was the memorable cities are known for their public realm because the area up along High Street and this church property is very much a portion of that public realm for this area. As we look at the site, I've got this is looking to the south. We've got High Street in through here. The subject property is right. And I'm going to zoom in on that. You can see the church itself, the two residential properties along South Upper Street. This is Brokeby Hall along South Mill. You can see that the church has the existing parking lot in the corner. This is the parking lot where the graphic that I just showed you from the downtown master plan was proposing an infill building. Once again, looking at it from – I can't even get my directions right now. Looking at it from another direction. It's been a while since I've been up here. Did I mention that? Northwest. This is High Street and Upper again. You can see the backs of these, of the two residential structures. The one at the corner of Max Alley and South Upper Street does have a parking area to the rear. And then finally, just kind of front view along South Upper of the residential structures there. I wanted to highlight this area. Tom can talk about it more on the development plan. I wanted to try it. I did read all 10 of those letters out there and there are a few things in those letters that I believe are misconceptions that I kind of want to clear up. The staff, as I get into the report, I believe that there's a misconception that this entire zone change is just for the convenience of the applicant. And it's not necessarily so because for the The applicants proposed expansion of their fellowship hall back in this area that's in the yellow. As it's proposed, it would get into this parking area along these residential lots. These R2 lots are multifamily residences right now. But one of them is zoned R2 and one of them is zoned R4. They would not be able to get smaller and you wouldn't be able to take any parking off of those lots if they remained with the existing zoning. Therefore you couldn't make these lots any smaller and thusly you couldn't put the fellowship hall over top of the lot lines because there's building code implications, fire code implications, all of those types of issues that would go along with that. The staff looked at this zoning application as we do all zoning applications, and the first thing that we looked at is the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan, as you know, recommends the downtown master plan. As I've said many times before, the downtown master plan, whenever it was adopted into the 2007 comprehensive plan, got away from the traditional land uses of colors on the map. And it looked more towards, it's more of a plan of how people and places all function together and how those peoples and places can be planned together. So as we were looking at that, and as I mentioned in my earlier statements, the plan really focuses on residential and some mixed-use infill as it makes its specific recommendations as it goes throughout the plan. The staff had a hard time finding any recommendations directly related to institutional uses in the downtown master plan. But as we all know, referring back to the 2001 Comprehensive Plan, we do have a desire to keep our institutional uses, especially our churches, in the city and allow them to expand and grow. So with that being said, it does say in our staff report that the staff could not find that it was in strict – let me see if I can find the exact wording. We say that it was difficult to say that it's in complete agreement with the comprehensive plan. But I wanted to make it clear that the staff does not believe that this is in disagreement with the comprehensive plan. Whenever you look at our goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, I believe that they support this proposal. Whenever you look at our overall goal of not expanding our urban service area and trying to intensify all of our uses, I believe that that's a very important thing. But that doesn't mean that anything that comes before us is automatically approved, because although we do want to intensify our uses, we want to intensify them in an appropriate and compatible manner. That's where the staff also looked at the appropriate, since we couldn't say that it's in complete agreement with the comprehensive plan, we did look at the appropriateness of the proposed zone change. and we did find that it is appropriate and the existing zoning is inappropriate for the church. First of all, to address the appropriateness of it, the staff found that Max Alley, as it comes down and makes its 90-degree turn, creates a very nice land use buffer for the B2B zoning, a very logical place to bring the B2B zoning back to. It also, Rokeby Hall also creates a very nice, with appropriate conditional zoning restrictions, which I'll go over in the end of my presentation, makes a very good land use buffer for the proposed B2B zoning. We also did find that it is unusual for a site such as this to have a combination of B2B, R2, and R4 zoning all on it. If you were to rezone this property and ultimately the council rezone this property in B2B, churches are in allowed principle permitted use and it would not have to go to the Board of Adjustment for further expansions. It would, however, be controlled by two things, the development plan, which will be in front of you, and also the fact that it's in a historic zone. And I apologize for just now getting to that, but the entire property that's before you today is currently in historic zoning. That means that any type of physical changes to the exterior of the property does have to go in front of the Board of Architectural Review for their approval. there is not a proposed change to the historic zoning on the subject property. The staff did feel that it was very important, though, in order to keep the proposed B2B zoning and the proposed development of the church, in order to keep that compatible with the existing neighborhood, we felt that it was very important to recommend conditional zoning restrictions. And you can see on your agenda and also on the blue sheet, which is in your book, should be in your books, our proposed conditional zoning restrictions. These are revised conditional zoning restrictions, which are a result of our zoning committee meetings. Let me rephrase that. It's a result of us meeting with the applicants after the zoning committee meeting. there are some fairly minor changes to the prohibited uses that the church asked for that the staff thought was very reasonable first of all I just kind of want to go over the conditional zoning restrictions we are proposing to prohibit cocktail lounges, nightclubs display rental of automobiles, trucks indoor and outdoor amusement enterprises as principal permitted uses meaning such that so that if the church was going to have a carnival or something like that, it's not they couldn't bring in Barnum and Bailey's circus as a principal permitted use, but if the church wanted to hold a carnival or something like that, it would be accessory to the church use. So we felt that that was a clear distinction. Major and minor automobile, truck repair, drug stores, service stations, mining, all buildings will be limited to a maximum height of 40 feet. And finally, we were, for the Rokeby Hall at 318 South Mill Street, we are proposing a very restrictive uses so that it would only be limited to church uses, professional offices, and residential use. thus ensuring that Rokkeby Hall becomes that transition and that buffer that we feel is very important in this B2B zoning request. The staff did feel that the church asked us to change it from church office to church uses, so that if in the – right now I believe that they are using it just as church offices, but if they wanted to hold some Sunday school or something like that in there, then that would be allowable use. We feel that these restrictions are appropriate and necessary to ensure that the uses on the subject property create the compatible transition from the historic South Hill neighborhood and to the downtown business core. I believe that concludes my presentation, my prepared remarks. Of course, I'll be available for questions throughout your hearing, and if you have any questions on the zoning report, I'll be happy to try and answer those now. Thank you, Jimmy. Are there any questions for Mr. Ammons from the Commission? Otherwise, I'll turn it over to Mr. Martin for the development plan. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, on page two of your agenda, ZDP 2008-147 First United Methodist Church is the preliminary development plan associated with this zone change. Again, as Mr. Emmons explained, we have the existing church structure here, the sanctuary that fronts on West High Street. Here we have South Upper Street with the two residential structures. Here is the office use for the church. Again, it's located on South Mill Street. This area is currently the parking. for the church. We have an access point here, a one-way access point out to West High Street, two-way access point on South Mill Street, and here you have Max Alley, which has a two-way access point located there as well. This area is the proposed Fellowship Hall, approximately 10,000 square feet. Again, as I stated, this is a preliminary development plan. It will be necessary for them to bring a final development plan back before you before they can do any construction on this site. We have reviewed this plan and have 10 conditions, as you can see on your agenda. They are fairly standard. we have asked that they clearly denote those parking areas on the plan. And we've asked them to clarify a screening note. And it's a landscape screening note, and I'll briefly explain that. They've added a note right here that is nothing more than a statement of Article 18. And it refers to the use of a fence, which allows you to reduce the screening. Again, they have a note on here stating they will meet Article 18. The staff just wants it clarified if that is their intent, then that should be demonstrated on the plan with the landscape buffer area with the appropriate width and the fence being proposed. Well, that was just a matter of clarification. We have asked that they resolve the minimum open space requirements for these residential units. Under the requested zoning, there is a minimum of 10% open space requirement for residential units. And these are existing residential units. And we're asking them to resolve that by indicating where that's going to be, how they're going to meet that on those individual lots. And again, these areas in here, these are individual lots. And B2B is going to require that they meet that usable open space requirement for these residential uses. And at this time with this plan, that's not clearly delineated. so we can see that they are capable of meeting that particular requirement. The subdivision committee did review this plan and did recommend approval. And if there are any questions, I'll be happy to try to answer. Thank you, Mr. Martin. Are there any questions for Tom? Miss Tom? Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman, Commission members, I'm Foster Ackerman, Jr., acting as attorney for First United Methodist Church. I'm also a member of the church, have been all my life. I'd like to introduce to you, Paul, would you stand, Reverend Paul Brunstetter, who is our senior minister and is also here today in case there are any questions that I'm not able to answer that he might be able to. I want to say first we are in agreement with the staff recommendation and all of the conditions, although personally I hate to give up horse racing, but I understand how that might be part of it. I think Mr. Emmons did a very good job of going through the information you would need to understand what the church's interest is in doing this. in part a zone change will cure the disfavored instance where a lot is divided into two different zones. And it allows us to build our fellowship hall. As Mr. Emmons said, Mr. Martin identified where that will be, that design. It was subject to the Board of Architectural Review, and we have had preliminary meetings with them. and I believe we're at a design standpoint where things are looking good from that direction. Our current fellowship hall is in the basement. Underneath, a classroom portion of the church is not adequate to hold meetings the size of our congregation. It is today. It's probably a 60- or 70-year-old construction. The kitchen is obviously very old, and there's a lot of advantages the church will get out of being able to build a new fellowship hall. Just to give you a tidbit, a taste of the information about First United Methodist Church, we were established in 1789 and celebrated our bicentennial 20 years ago. We were one of the first 100 Methodist churches in the United States, the first Methodist church this side of the Allegheny Mountains. And prior to 1804, the church was located at a couple of other sites in Lexington. In 1840, we acquired a lot in the middle of the block at roughly 214 West High Street and erected our church there. So we have been at our current location since 1840. We're currently in the third sanctuary on this site. And as you can see from the total area that the church occupies, we've had a historic pattern of continued growth and expansion over that time period. So when you contemplate the comprehensive plan and the downtown master plan, one of the facts in existence and therefore deemed to have been contemplated at the time those plans were authored and adopted is this pattern of growth of the downtown churches. It's not just the Methodist Church, the Episcopal Church, Central Christian Church, the Baptist Church on High Street all have exhibited similar patterns of growth. So this is something that is not unanticipated when you consider downtown growth and development. All three of the houses that are shown on the plan there will be retained and maintained by the church. that is not with the two on Upper Street, that was not always the case historically. So we think church ownership is contributing to the neighborhood in the sense that we are in a position to better maintain. If, and this partly addresses the open space issue, if the zone change is approved, we intend to file to consolidate all of the lots into one tract, as we had historically done. And underneath our main tract are some 18 different tracts of land that we've acquired over the last 167, 69 years. And so that would all be consolidated into one tract. So on-site parking would be allocated to residents if, in fact, residential use continues to be the case in those two buildings. We have no specific plan, but just the way things work over time with churches, it's likely we'll end up using the buildings for church purposes. Now, Mr. Cassidy, who is here representing the South Hill Association, was kind enough to send you a large packet of information setting forth their objections. And I'd like to go ahead in the time I have now and address some of those objections and then I can follow up if need be in the rebuttal time period. We have had several meetings with Mr. Cassidy and or other members of the South Hill Association since we first filed in November of last year. We, of course, believe we've been good neighbors to South Hill. We did, as we said we would do with Rokeby Hall and preserve that historic building. and if you've ever had a chance to go in it, it is really beautiful for church offices. We offered a number of concessions at the request of the neighborhood. We would have extended conditional zoning to our entire site, not just the area being rezoned, and would have eliminated virtually every use in the ordinance for a B2B except church purposes or residential uses. We would have created setback lines, building setback lines along High Street and Middle Street where none, sorry, High Street and Upper Street where none exist today. We would have agreed to height restrictions for any future building on our main campus along High Street. Ultimately, despite our willingness to make these concessions in an effort to get, if not support, at least neutrality, we were unable to finally reach an agreement. So we're here today working with the staff recommendations. There are about four, five key points if you take Mr. Cassidy's letter and boil it down. The first, that this B2B zoning amounts to an upzoning. Well, it is true the change from the residential use to the downtown zoning would normally be considered an upzoning to a more intensive use. But in this case, with restrictions that the staff have put forth and we have agreed to, we have functionally kept the zone on a use basis the same while solving some of our problems. As Mr. Emmons pointed out, with the minimum lot requirement applicable to the houses on Upper Street, one of which is nonconforming in that regard, we would be unable to site the new fellowship hall where it is. sited as it is, sited as the fellowship hall is, permits us, and it's really not shown clearly here, but permits us to maintain our vehicular access to Backs Alley. And we're going to restructure the parking pattern. We'll have a new entry area here with a covered drop-off. Currently, if you drive in, the passenger's on the wrong side of the car to get in the door. going to have a little roundabout in a way so that passengers will be dropped off where the passenger is undercover right at the door. If we had to meet the minimum lot size, in other words, not rezone, this would push the Fellowship Hall building over this way and, if not severely restrict, possibly block access for vehicular traffic down Max Alley, and that, of course, on Sunday mornings when everybody is leaving is one of our entry points. So, in sum on that point, this is not really an up-zoning, it's a modification to make things work for what the church is attempting to accomplish. There's the objection that there is no designated required parking for the residential uses. Of course, after we consolidate all these lots, we will have all the buildings on one site, we'll end up designating parking spaces for the residents of the building in our main parking lot after everything is completed. And certainly, once we consolidate the lots, if the church ever decided to sell off one of the houses, that would require a subdivision plat and you all would have the opportunity at that time to demand appropriate parking be accompanying any lot that would be subdivided and sold off. And yes, to some degree there are other ways to go about doing what we're trying to do. We could go for conditional uses. We could ask for a number of variances. Some of the things like the minimum lot size we might not be able to get. We might have to look at text amendments. There are a variety of ways to go at it. But the law does not require the applicant to seek the most complicated method of solving a problem when the applicant wants to do something. And in our case, the easiest way to go about this is the zone change. Perhaps South Hill, and I strongly support South Hill, and our church does. We allow them to, their association to meet in the church. South Hill's biggest image, if you their best point of argument is that they are a historic and a historically residential neighborhood, and Mr. Cassidy makes that point. That's not completely true, of course, because within South Hill, there's been Dudley School and now Dudley Square. There was a sanitarium or some kind of hospital located on a house on South Upper Street just a couple of lots away from the church. But what that position ignores is that there's an equally valid argument that the north end of South Hill, where we are, has been historically religious longer than it has been historically residential. The lot we acquired in 1840 in 1799 was purchased by a German Lutheran communion church. They erected a church and a school on the property. And as I say, we acquired the property from them when that congregation was not able to maintain its own existence. And so since 1799, a good 13 years before any of those three houses were built, there has been a church on this site. And so as I make the point, it is as equally valid to say that it is a historic religious site as it is to say it's a historic residential neighborhood. Finally, they argue that the application is not in conformity with the comprehensive plan. Mr. Emmons addressed several of those points, and there's no need for me to reiterate the facts as he put them forth. We have been there. We have been a part of the neighborhood. We have consistently grown. And that's a fact that was well known at the time that both of the comprehensive plan and the master plan were adopted. So that's our position. We request that you grant us our zone change, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Aukerman. Are there any questions for Mr. Aukerman at this time from commission? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay, at this time we'll accept citizen's comment and we will begin with persons that are in favor of this request for. Mr. Chairman, out of, someone's here I'm not aware of, out of respect of your time, we did not try to rally a lot of people to show up. Okay, thank you. Okay. At this time, I don't see any at this time. Are there those wishing to speak in opposition to this application? Yes, sir, if you come forward. If you could give us your name and address, please. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the Commission. My name is Peter Cassidy. I live at 324 South Mill Street, which... I just want to also agree with some of the comments that Foster made. that we certainly do enjoy having the church as part of our neighborhood, and I certainly do appreciate working with them and having the courtesy and cooperation of Reverend Brunstetter. I've enjoyed meeting him and working with Foster over the last several months to try to come to a resolution on this. I'm speaking to you not just as a neighbor of this loan change but also as president of the South Hill Neighborhood Association, which is the neighborhood that encompasses this area that is before you today. I have sent by email as well as hand-delivered a letter to Bill Sally at the beginning of this week, and I hope that you all have it with you. It has approximately a four-page letter, five-page letter, excuse me, that has various exhibits attached to it. I'm just going to go through some of the points that I've articulated in that letter. And, again, first of all, before getting into that, I do want to reiterate that we do enjoy having the church right next door to us as part of our neighborhood. We appreciate everything that they've provided by way of meeting space for us on a monthly basis. And, again, certainly have enjoyed getting to work with them and try to figure out how to come to a resolution of this. The main objection I would say that the neighborhood has to allow in this zone change to proceed as requested is that the properties that are being requested to be changed from R2 and R4 to B2B have actually previously been down zoned by this planning commission about 10 years ago at the request of the neighborhood association. Several of the properties were R4. A request was made by the Neighborhood Association about 10 years ago to down zone those properties to an R2. The Planning Commission and its staff at that time looked at that application, looked at the planning documents that were in place at that time and determined that it made sense to do that and approved that zone change request. Several of the planned documents that were reviewed at that time included the South Broadway Corridor Plan in the North University Small Area Plan. I don't know if you all have ever looked at those documents or are familiar with those plans, but what you see, what I see at least sometimes when I'm watching the cable channel 3, is that these are things that you ask the community to come and participate in. You ask the neighborhoods, you ask people that live in these communities to come and say, look, meet with the staff, come up with what you think would be a zoning plan for the future of your area that you live in that you have a vested interest in. And let's reduce that to a document. Let's make that a working document. We'll use that in our planning tools and our processes. And that's what was done in this case, and that's what the justification was for downzoning some of these properties from R4 to R2 about 10 years or so ago. I respectfully submit to you all that there's nothing that has changed with respect to those small area plans. I'm not aware, and staff, I hope, will correct me if I am wrong, but that those small area plans have not been updated that affect this particular area that we're here about today. And again, if I'm wrong, I'm sure staff will correct me on that. The second main reason that I'd like to bring up is that this is a B2B zone, and I'm just going to walk over here. I'll take the microphone, I guess, with me. There was a slide earlier that was up on the screen that was helpful, but in any event, if you look, we've got a B2B zone that's a pretty uniform zone line that runs almost parallel to West High Street right now. That's what the current zoning is. There's a small little hiccup somewhere over here, but generally, it's a parallel zone line that runs B2B parallel to West High Street. Between that high intensity B2B zone, which by the way is a Lexington Center zone, my understanding, and again staff can correct me if I'm wrong, that this was a zone that was created specifically 35 some odd years ago when the Planning Commission allowed the Rupp Arena and the Civic Center development to occur. We needed to create a zone in downtown that would allow the flexibility, most flexibility, for development such as that to exist. At that time, the B2B zone was extended along corridor of West High Street and included the area that the church uses now as its existing sanctuary as well as its parking lot up here. In between that B2B zone that runs approximately, again, parallel to High Street, the boundary, there is a nice buffer zone that exists now of R4. It's non-uniform in the area where it comes back here at the corner of Max Alley that staff discussed earlier, and then it comes back up. And then these areas here, these two buildings that the church acquired recently, probably within the last couple of years or so, are R2. And these were acquired, again, I think, to construct the proposed fellowship hall. The proposed fellowship hall is not anything that the neighborhood, by the way, has any strong objection to. We're not here to try to prevent the church from ever changing its property. We want the church to continue to grow and to be a good neighbor for us. Based upon the plans that we've seen so far, which are preliminary, as noted by Mr. Martin, there's lots of other details to come, we feel like we could support and have told the church that we can support their application for variances and conditional uses. That would be something that would typically come before the Board of Adjustment, as I understand it. I'm not an attorney that practices in this area and regularly speaks before the Planning Commission. But it's my understanding that a minimum lot size variance is not something that is – That's one of the reasons we have a variance procedure in the Board of Adjustment, is to grant a variance for a minimum lot size when you want to have a development in a zone that otherwise doesn't permit it. What the neighborhood has said in this case to the church is, look, we have stood for, we being the neighborhood have stood for in the 35-some-odd years that we've been here and that we've been trying to preserve and grow our neighborhood, is that we're not interested in having the intrusion of the B2B zone any further into our residential core, into our neighborhood. However, we appreciate everything that you all have done, and we are good neighbors, as you all are good neighbors, and we want to work with you to get this building built the way that you want it to be built so that your congregation can grow. And what we've asked them to do is to submit a variance and conditional use application as necessary to submit before the Board of Adjustment or before this body to build the fellowship hall. And so those are really the main two reasons that I see, and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for me to have the Planning Commission. I don't know, I don't think any of the members that are here today were members of the Planning Commission 10 years ago, but just, again, I pointed this out in my letter. That was a 9-to-1 vote. It was a 9-to-1 vote that found it appropriate to down zone the properties from R4 to R2. And it just flabbergasted me a little bit to understand the rationale as to why when we already have a good R4 buffer zone between high intensity B2B, as to why all of a sudden Max Alley becomes a very attractive demarcation line or buffer zone between R2 already. Why not keep what we have there, grant a variance, grant a conditional use, and let the fellowship hall addition be built? That's all that we're asking for, really, when it comes down to it. I think that there are some – we don't know the extent of what types of variances would be necessary because we don't know all of the details, I don't think, of what the proposed building would require. But with the cooperation with the church in the neighborhood over the last few months, I think we've identified most of the areas that are of concern to us, and I feel completely confident that we'd be able to come to an agreement in that situation. Let me just thumb through my notes here a little bit more if you don't mind. I have also on the last couple of pages of my letter pointed out what I think are some goals and principles from the 2007 comprehensive plan, some actual language from the 2007 comprehensive plan, which I feel is much more supportive of the neighborhoods, of the residential character and the infill and redevelopment properties that we see in downtown. Again, that's on pages four and five of my letter. respectfully to Mr. Emmons, and I enjoy working with Jimmy, and he has, or whoever wrote the staff report, I feel like did make a rather large concession when they wrote that it is difficult to say that the requested zone change is in complete agreement with the comprehensive plan. To me, that just starts out and says, we don't really think this is going to work, but we'll try to figure out how we can, you know, fit a square peg into a round hole, and here's why. I've got a couple of attachments to my letter there. Respectfully, the church has been around for many years, and we would love for them to be around many more years, but the particular properties being requested to be rezoned here today have been historically residential. And as far as Rokeby Hall is concerned, and the church has done a very nice job with that property. However, I'm completely at a loss as to why that property needs to be rezoned in order for the fellowship hall to be built. It's not in the back of those properties. It's in the back of the South Upper Street properties. So technically speaking, while we would all like to have in our druthers just to submit an application to the city when it met our convenience to build what we wanted to build, that's not always how it works. and that's just not, I don't think, a really good reason to have the Planning Commission to approve its own change to B2B. We'd all like to simplify our planning processes to require a little less involvement, if you will, with city agencies and commissions, but that's not always how it works. With that, I think that I'm going to close. There may be some other members here of the Neighborhood Association as well as surrounding neighborhood associations. I did want to point out one other thing that Mr. Emmons mentioned. We did have the Northside Neighborhood Association, I believe, sent a letter opposing this zone change request. The Western Suburb, I believe, Neighborhood Association sent a letter asking you all to oppose this zone change request. I believe that the Executive Director or the Commissioner of the Historic Preservation Commission also sent a letter requesting that you all oppose this, as well as the Bluegrass Trust. So there are several. Those organizations represent a substantial number of people. Okay? Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Cassidy. Ladies and gentlemen of the Planning Commission, Mr. Chair, my name is Daniel Rowland. I presently reside at 121 North Martin Luther King. But for 35 years, I lived at 432 South Mill Street. and I have held every office in the South Hill neighborhood except for Treasurer, which I held for three weeks, and after I bounced two checks, I was removed from that office. I wanted to do two things very quickly. One is I wanted to draw your attention to, I think, what's a very powerful letter from Mike Moiser, a person that many of you probably know. He has been a resident of Aylesford for 28 years. He's a past president. He served on the small area plan committees, many of them, the College Town Study Committee, the Downtown Master Plan Committee, and the Infill and Redevelopment Task Force. I also have served on all those things. A lot of the people that have been writing to you have been involved in planning about our neighborhoods for many, not years, but decades. We have thought about these issues over a long, long time, and I think we are universally upset by this proposal for the reasons that I'll explain in just a moment. But I do draw your attention to this letter by Mr. Moiser. He's one of the most, I think, effective community leaders that exists in Lexington. He's on the Town Gown Committee. He's just been a tremendously successful and active citizen. What I would like to do chiefly, and I'll do it as quickly as I can, is just to run through why it is that we in the South Hill and why Mike Moyzer of Aylesford and other historic neighborhoods are so concerned that they're prepared to come down here today and speak before you. From my experience in the South Hill, the experience of the Lexington Center parking lot was a wake-up call which demolished, as you know, 16 acres of residential housing to create a big parking lot. I had just moved to Lexington, and my wife, Wendy, who's here, and I got really involved in historic preservation because of that. This was like a major body blow to our neighborhood, as you can imagine it would have been. And so we immediately, in 1976, hired our own urban planning firm, Preservation Urban Design of Ann Arbor, Michigan, to do a small little neighborhood study to tell us how we can protect our neighborhood against these massive assaults, which seemed to be going on at that time. And that report, which I have a copy of and refer to often, said to us, the most difficult problem you have are your edges. Look where you are. You've got the north, you've got the downtown to the north, you've got the Civic Center to the west, you've got UK to the south, and you've got Good Sam Hospital to the east. and all these forces are coming in on you. You have to really pay attention to your boundaries. Of all these boundaries, the high street boundary is the most crucial. And so from the very beginning of our existence as a neighborhood association, we have policed the high street boundary with the greatest possible vigilance. We've taken part in the North University area plan process, the South Broadway area plan process. We've taken part in virtually every single comp plan exercise. And as Peter just said, we've done this to try to get our ducks in order in the most responsible way. And there's now not years but decades of work by your predecessors on the Planning Commission, plus decades of work by staff members of the Division of Planning Services. Bob Joyce, we work with him all the time, a long-range strategic planner, whom some of you may remember. This goes back literally to the late 1970s. And the crucial reason that we have spent all this time is that many of our south side neighborhoods, and South Hill in particular, is a fragile entity. It's really one block thick. It starts at High Street and starts to peter out at Maxwell Street. There's a strip of B2B on the south side of High Street, and that's where we want to keep it. And if you go, as Foster so kindly pointed out, to Maxwell Street, we have a P1 and B1 zoning along Maxwell Street with a delightful neighbor, obviously, Dudley Square. But it's essentially one block thick. If we say, okay, let's make the north part of our neighborhood religious, there's nothing left. We cannot afford to let that boundary between residential uses and B2B creep any further south because it's such a fragile matter. Everybody in the neighborhood would make a lot of money by converting our houses to law offices. We don't want to do that. Our neighborhood is a major historic resource. Thousands and thousands of people are going to visit the neighborhood in 2010. It's something that Europeans and foreign visitors want to see. we are as much in the public realm as the First United Methodist Church. Indeed, I love that building. It's one of the most beautiful buildings in the town, and I believe Foster likes all of our buildings. So my thought is let's keep living together peacefully, but B2B is a nuclear option in a residential neighborhood, and I don't think it's appropriate. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Rowland. Is there anyone else that would like to speak in opposition? I'm Bill Johnston, and I live at 645 West Short Street. I'm president of the Historic Western Suburb Neighborhood Association. I want to express my personal and the Historic Western Suburb Neighborhood Association's opposition to the zone change that go to B2B on the properties located at 318 South Mill, 323, 327 and 9 South Upper. These buildings play a major role in one of Lexington's premier districts and tourist attractions, South Hill. They were all built in the early part of the 19th century and are the literal cornerstones of what is one of the oldest and most interesting areas in the unique ring of 19th century neighborhoods that surround our downtown. It is important that both of these areas, the old neighborhoods and the downtown commercial core, respect each other. The Planning Commission in 1997 recognized this when it downzoned these very same properties from R4 to R2 in the Planning Commission's words to, quote, help preserve the South Hill neighborhood area. Now, apparently, preserving the South Hill neighborhood to be a residential area is no longer important, at least according to the staff recommendation. The Church wants to reverse the previously lauded down zone and up zone the properties to a zone that allows for civic center and convention facilities, banks, credit institutions, which I suppose includes check cashing, nightclubs, rental, sale of automobiles, self-service laundries, et cetera. This is preposterous. I understand there are restrictions that are being imposed, but then those restrictions when someone down the road decides to ignore them have to be enforced by who? The Neighborhood Association going to court? that makes no sense. True, the church is not requesting to use these properties in any of the above ways, but the zone they are requesting will allow all of the above listed uses and many, many more. The planning staff report states the church's request is not in conformance with the comprehensive plan, but that that is okay since it will, quote, simplify the church's planning and building processes as it will eliminate the need for the church to seek approval of a conditional use permit in the future. Using that logic, why not declare all properties to be B2B? That way everyone will be able to simplify their planning processes. Isn't the Board of Adjustment conditional use hearing process designed to prevent property owners from using properties in ways not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood? With the B2B zoning, the church, as well as future owners, will have no such restriction. Storms, fires, neglect can all result in the removal of buildings. Under B2B zoning, the owners will then have great license to build what they desire, which well may be damaging, if not devastating, to one of Lexington's unique and very valuable neighborhood treasures. So please reject this zoning request. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Johnston. I will try to speak directly into the microphones. My name is Timothy Carrillo. For anybody taking minutes, that's spelled K-U-R-Y-L-A. I live at 321 Madison Place. And by way of background, I live 25 years at 329 South Mill Street in South Hill. and I was also a member of the Neighborhood Association when we formed it and been on the board for many years. There have been good argument here presented by people in the Neighborhood Association and my one-time neighbor, Dan Roling. I just iterate what they're saying and let you know that Woodward Heights Neighborhood Association, of which I'm secretary, supports South Hill in asking that you turn down this request. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Karoloff. I'm Julie Good, Executive Director of the Bluegrass Trust. I live at 25 Hampton Court. The Bluegrass Trust strongly opposes approving the trustees for the First United Methodist Church's application to rezone the properties located along high mill and upper streets to B2B. It is absolutely critical that there be a consistency in the interpretation and application of the standards by which projects are evaluated by those charged with making recommendations to the Commission. The Planning Staff's report in this matter is wholly inconsistent with the Staff's past approach to zoning changes in general and with this Commission's prior decisions relating to these specific properties. The Bluegrass Trust for Historic Preservation asks that you deny this zone change for the sake of consistency, precedent, and affirming the goals and purposes of the H-1 overlay ordinance. The historic integrity of the South Hill neighborhood and downtown Lexington as a whole depends on you. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you very much. Can I get your name again? I'm sorry. Julie Good. Thank you, Ms. Ed. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, my name is Foster Pettit. I live at 316 West 2nd Street. And I'm wearing two hats here, not only for myself, as someone who lives in an historic area in downtown Lexington, but as president of Bluegrass Trust for Historic Preservation, you have been told of many of the reasons why you should not support this application. We're all very fond of the First United Methodist Church, and I appreciate their historic presence in downtown Lexington, great citizens. But Foster, I have to tell you, the First Presbyterian Church is 56 years older than, and that's my church, than your church. And I cite that not just to get one up on you, though I like to do that occasionally. But the first minister of the First Presbyterian Church was Adam Rankin. And his house was moved from High Street. You may remember when the urban renewal was coming through, and put on Mill Street, which is one of the great, I think, treasures of this area. But I want to recite a story, which some of you may know. The First Presbyterian Church started Maxwell Street Presbyterian Church over 100 years ago as its outreach to the community. It was not where it is now. Now, the first church was built and is still standing for that church just east, sorry, west of Limestone. They decided they needed a bigger church, so they built where they are today, further east. A Jewish synagogue bought that church and for many years conducted their religious services there. Then they needed more space. So they went to the suburbs and built a nice facility there. Now, if you want to get spaghetti and meatballs that are wonderful or a good pizza, you go to that location now and Joe Bologna will serve you quite well. Now, the point of this story is to say that what we're doing here is for the long term. and churches grow or for whatever reason decide to move and the properties remain. And I think we have to know that new owners have different ideas about how to use properties. And if we permit this to be a B2B, there can be an application I can see coming forth, what, 50 years from now? Now, you know, we want this, we want to go back, we want to take off some of the restrictions. It no longer applies for some reason. I just know that you have to make these decisions based on what you think will work for years ahead. This neighborhood is very, very special. It's a jewel in the center of our city. And I think it's something we need to do all we can to preserve. And furthermore, as has been said, this zone change is not vital for the church to develop as it would like to develop. And we all support that. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Pettit. Any other comments from citizens? Okay. This time, staff, do you have any rebuttal? Thank you, sir. I just wanted to clarify a few things. First of all, on the small area plans that were mentioned, they are over 10 years old and our comprehensive plan does have the sunset provisions for small area plans that are over that age. And the reason for that is because with each comprehensive plan, as you can remember, we look at comprehensive plans that have been about 10 years old or ones that are going to be come over 10 years old before we get to our next comprehensive plan. And it doesn't mean that the recommendations of those plans are invalid. Sometimes as time goes on and our plans change and our goals for our community change, sometimes they're not valid anymore. So what we end up doing is we review each one and we take those pieces and parts, the best parts of those, and we incorporate them into our current plan. And if it's no longer appropriate, then we don't do it. That's the reason why we have the sunset clause for those small area plans. The staff would also like to point out that at this time, just as a clarification, there are not any variances to the minimum required parking or minimum lot sizes. That was mentioned during the hearing. More along the lines of getting a little bit more serious now, more than just clarification, I wanted to point out that the staff has not abandoned our commitment for the continued desire and protection for the historic neighborhood with this proposal. We feel that the proposed conditional zoning restrictions and the historic zoning provides appropriate protection for the neighborhood while allowing the development of the church property an appropriate new development through there. And also there was questions about the staffs having an inconsistent approach. And I kind of want to address that a little bit because it's not from our perspective it's not an inconsistent approach as we look at this with the 2007 comprehensive plan whenever the planning commission adopted the downtown master plan and the kind of the policies and the issues that were in there along with the not expanding the urban service area boundary we got away from traditional look at the land use color on the map and that's what what we're going to zone it. We looked at the comprehensive plan as an entire document. And the downtown master plan, those kind of core principles that are in that downtown master plan of increasing infill, finding the redevelopment opportunities, increasing our urban core, and making our downtown a more vibrant place, those are incorporated into our comprehensive plan. So whenever the staff looked at all of the factors, every time that we've stood in front of you, and we've had several zone changes now that have been in this area that's recommended for the downtown master plan, if you notice, we almost always not only talk about whether it is or isn't in agreement with the plan, but we talk about whether the zone change in and of itself is appropriate. Because oftentimes as that comprehensive plan, as it denotes those types of things, oftentimes whenever you do have an appropriate zone change, its appropriateness brings it into compliance with the comprehensive plan. That's why I did clarify during my original staff report, and I'll end with it. The staff did not say that this is in disagreement with the comprehensive plan. We said that we could not find it to be in complete agreement with it because we found it silent to infill and redevelopment opportunities for those types of institutional uses in through here. We did, however, find it appropriate and thusly recommended approval of this zone change for the reasons that I mentioned earlier. I believe that concludes my rebuttal remarks. If they're, of course, they're in commission. If you have any questions for me now, I'll be happy to take them and will be available throughout your hearing, should you have any questions for any of the staff. Yes, Mr. Holmes. Yes, Jimmy. Could you clarify, I guess you say in the downtown master plan, is it more policy-driven or does it speak to the site in terms of land use or policy? The land use, do you remember the graphic in recommendation one where it had basically Basically, land use-wise, the downtown master plan recommends putting into kind of functional categories where you would have the downtown core in the red, those mixed-use corridors in the blue along your main arterials, and then the residential neighborhoods in through there. So you take that, and then it also goes on to say that you also need to take into account the particular land use recommendation of the 2001 and all of the policies. And that's what the staff looked at whenever to come to our conclusions. Did I answer your question? I think I did. Thank you. Mr. Owens. Thank you. Jamie, first of all, could we get put back up on the screen where the zones, the two different zones are, the B2B and R2 and R4? Bring it up. I guess, you know, first... There we go. The current church building. The current church building. Is in both zones? It is. Okay. It currently goes across the B2B and the R4 zoning. Okay. Clarify for me, if you would. as far as there's been a lot of comments as far as another means of getting this done through the Board of Adjustment. If I'm not mistaken, the two residential zones that we're talking about could have church structures as a conditional use. I believe what everybody is referring to in the R4 and the R2 zones, churches are allowed conditional uses in those current zones. What I was trying to say that becomes the problem are with these two residential structures along South Upper Street and the lots that are associated with them. with the church's plans to come back in through there, those lots would have to get smaller and they would become non-conforming. And that's where that's, you can't, there is not a variance to the lot size for the properties and there's not a variance to the parking as our ordinance currently reads. Okay, so are you saying that they would not be able to get conditional approval through the BOA? I don't know until it all gets there. They were talking about fitting square pegs into round holes. I'm very good at that. But off the top of my head, I can't think of how they would accomplish their current plans other than the zone change. Okay. I've got other staff members here. If anybody needs to jump in and correct me on that. Mr. Owens, our understanding is that at least one of the two residential lots that's R2 there, those lots could not be made smaller. There is no such thing as a lot size variance allowable for those lots. Okay. That's where the church expansion is proposed. Are you saying going VOA route, it's not possible? For the conditional use, yes. To make the two residential lots there smaller, no. Okay. You just about had me there. And just for clarification, in order to build what they want, the conditional use is necessary then, but it would need to cross the boundary of the property, and building inspection will not let them do that. A building line or a building cannot cross a property line, so you would have to, to build what they want, move your property line, but the board can't approve the property line moving. The only way that I can think of is if those two residential uses became church uses and were no longer residential uses and became part of the overall church and part of the conditional use application. That goes against our downtown master plan's recommendation for increasing residential density where we can. In particular, this site was recommended for more infill development. Okay. Thanks, Jimmy. One other question, I guess. as far as the corner of West High Street and South Mill Street, that is currently zoned B2B? It is currently zoned B2B. That part is not part of the zone change that's in front of you. It is governed on the development plan. Correct. So with that zoning right now, other development could take place given the – if they go through that route. Yes, sir. Right. Okay. Okay. Restriction-wise, the restrictions that's been suggested here, that would just apply to the new, what is being rezoned, it wouldn't apply to the other? Yes, sir. That is correct. Okay. Thank you. Ms. Copeland? Mr. Emmons, my understanding that you just said that they could build their fellowship hall, maybe not their 10,000 square foot fellowship hall that's a long rectangle, but maybe a square basketball shaped fellowship hall up at West High and Mill Street, and we would have no problem. Is that right? Rupp Arena might have a problem with a basketball shaped building, but they have. I'm not aware of any restrictions on that corner. So they have a site it's just not where they would like for it to be. Yes. Thank you. Mr. Brewer? Yeah, I'm again swayed heavily by the arguments that were made by the various neighborhood associations involved in this and I think it is critical that we do try to preserve the edge on this district. That being said, I'm cognizant that this church is a jewel in itself, and we should make every attempt to provide them the opportunity to grow as they need it. But I think that's what the Neighborhood Association is saying also. Several people have said that a variance option of some sort is available to do what they want to do. You and several other people have said that that's not the case. Is there no other zone option that would allow them to do it that would be more palatable to the neighborhoods? I can only think of the other B2 and B2A zones that would allow that. The B2B is a more restrictive zone than either of those zones. So the B2B is more restrictive of the three downtown zones, I believe. It depends on how you're looking at it use-wise. Thank you. Any other? Ms. Phillips? Jimmy, I'm trying to figure out how we can accommodate this, too, because I think that this community has seen a decentralization of churches. So many churches have moved out of downtown, and we need to find a way that this church can grow. So there's no way that with the consolidation that those two residential structures on Upper Street could not in some form or fashion be considered a church use? Without the zone change, the R2 and the R4 zones, well, the R2 zone only allows the one duplex on the lot. So there's not even really, under our current regulations, there's not a way to take a development plan to put the church and the R2 lot on the same property under our current regulations. But I would hate to see those historic structures torn down. Absolutely. This is where we feel like we're in a rock and a hard place because we're not in a rock and a hard place. I apologize, the wrong phrase. We're supportive of both the historic neighborhood and the church expansion, and that's the reason why we're recommending what we're recommending. Well, it just seems to me that this is a pretty simple request, and I don't think that the request, the fellowship hall, will deteriorate the incredibly beautiful South Hill neighborhood. I think that it will only add to the history of the neighborhood and the history of the church. And it just is frustrating to me that our regulatory tools in place are not equipped to deal with this kind of land use issue. And I'm wondering if maybe we could, I know you guys have been dealing with this since November, but is there some way that we could find a way so as to not allow this rezoning, which understandably would encroach on South Hill? I would be nervous, too. Is there some way that we could tweak some of the rules before rendering a decision on this so that they could accommodate it? With all due respect, whenever the staff was meeting with the applicant in our pre-application conferences, the rezoning to B2B was the way under our existing zoning to accomplish all of these goals. Ms. Bowling, you have something to do with that? I mean, the H-1 overlay will remain. They can't just go in and tear down the buildings no matter what the underlying zoning is. I mean, they're still protected. They would have to go to BOAR and get a demolition permit to take anything down. If it were not for the proposed conditional zoning restrictions and the existing H-1, I'm not sure what the staff recommendation would be. Thank you. Jimmy, I have one question on the prohibited uses and conditional zoning. Yes. Particularly on the conditional uses, item 6 that talks about drive-through, was the discussion about prohibiting that as a conditional use altogether? I do not remember. I'm going to look over to my colleagues and see if any of them remember discussions on drive-thrus. Specifically? We do not. And I guess I was looking at number six and number eight. Eight talks about recycling centers or recycling drop-off points or whatever. I was just curious why those two weren't added to that portion of it. That I'm also going to have to, I can get with my colleagues and get back with you on that one. I don't remember the specific thought process. I'm going to have to jog my memory a little bit. Well, I guess what drove that was Max Alley. I know you talked about that being the border, but that's also an access point. And if you look at that aspect of it, you know, those types of things do take away from the residential character. And I can tell you, even though I can't remember right now specifically what our thinking was when we came up with our list of prohibited, should the commission wish to prohibit those uses, the staff would not have any problems with any objections to that. I don't know if the applicant would or would not, but I can tell you that the staff would not have any. Okay. And I believe that our findings for approval would be able to also cover those uses. Thank you. Mr. Holmes. You know, under that line of prohibited uses, could you prohibit all uses except what would permit a fellowship hall? The staff wants to, the staff is multiple times. We want to stay away from single-use conditional zoning because, quite frankly, times do change. Plans change and everything like that. another 50 years down the road, that fellowship hall might be there, but it might be used as something other than a fellowship hall. Precisely. That then would come back to the commission. It could. In our experience, there are a few properties that have been so conditionally prohibited through conditional zoning that they have become very difficult to deal with over time. And the staff is not afraid of a very prohibited, but we want to stay away from one use. We want to keep some appropriate options open for every piece of property that we use conditional zoning restrictions on. Thank you. Any other questions for Jimmy? Thank you, sir. Thank you. Commissioner? Mr. Chairman, let me address the last questions first. We would have no objection, Mr. Chairman, to prohibiting the conditional use number six for drive-through facilities or number nine, if that were the Commission's desire in the process of granting this. Mr. Holmes, one of the difficulties in a blanket sort of coverage on this comes up as you try to anticipate how church use functions in the use categories. For example, one of the accessory uses permitted in a B2B is a health club. And if we just said, okay, nothing but church use is permitted, then if we decided to have a gymnasium, what's commonly called a Christian life facility, suddenly we've found ourselves having a health club or an athletic club being banned. Parking lots are part of that. Satellite dishes. As Mr. Emmons said, we can't predict in terms of communications technology where 10 years is going, much less where 50 years is going. Coming around to one of the other concerns expressed by Mayor Pettit, and by the way, I appreciate the quality of the objectors that we've drawn today. He mentioned that prior churches in the area have moved, and First Church has been given the opportunity a half dozen times in its life to leave downtown Lexington for another location. We've been encouraged by bishops to relocate, and we have repeatedly rededicated ourselves to staying in downtown. But Mayor Pettit is correct. Churches do grow if they're successful. We, in fact, have adopted a policy and practice of growing through establishing satellite campuses. We have a 10-acre campus on Todd's Road at what will be Polo Club Boulevard and are running services out there and Sunday schools out there and have a good strong attendance of 140 every Sunday there. So we're not leaving. And if we had any thought of leaving, we wouldn't be attempting to build a new building downtown. down. What I hear from all of the objectors is they have no objection to our use of the property for church purposes and certainly nobody objects if something stays residential. It is the concept of expanding the B2B that is difficult. The solution, and Ms. Phillips, you were looking for how our own regulations provide solutions. The solution was the adoption of conditional zoning as a means of modifying otherwise what would put us in a position of being wide open on the use. As we said, we're willing to abide by those conditions and a couple of additional conditions if those are desired. The main point that is important to understand about the location of the fellowship hall is that it is directly at the rear of our sanctuary. Now, there are intervening classrooms. Our plan, this will help you understand why this is where it needs to be instead of over here. We have three or four little rooms and a parlor back in this way in a rear hallway. Our plan is to establish the new entry I mentioned and a corridor straight from the sanctuary back to the Fellowship Hall so that if we have an activity going on after a service, people are not going all through other parts of the church to get back to the fellowship hall. This really is the best location and disturbs the least amount of our parking compared to erecting a structure over in this area where we would have to run a hallway through an existing chapel in order to access that. So this, as you all have encountered in many other hearings, Sometimes the site drives a lot of the conclusions, and that's why the building is back here. I also want to emphasize that all three of these houses we intend to retain. We will maintain them better than the absentee landlords have in the past. I made that statement 10 years ago, and we requested a conditional use for Rokkeby Hall. And if anybody saw that building 20 years ago and saw it today, you would see that the church keeps its promises. We have already spent thousands of dollars fixing code violations that existed in those properties when we took ownership. So we're already doing a better job with them and preserving them better for the neighborhood than they had in the past. I've heard many times and at times supported the notion that the South Hill area is a fragile, narrow space that really has to watch all of its edges. That argument I don't think hires as much currency as it used to with the development of the new townhouses on down south and the residential uses and over towards Broadway. The fear that the warehouse district, which used to lay south of South Hill, would be converted to intense commercial use has now passed. The community has gone in a different direction. So while there is a lot to say that South Hill is a small area, we are helping it. We are preserving buildings. This is the most efficient way to go about accomplishing. Otherwise we would be put into the posture of having to look for text amendments to the ordinance in order to reduce minimum lot sizes, create variances that don't exist, go to the Board of Architectural Review, go to the Board of Adjustment, ultimately possibly back to you. As I said earlier, the applicant is not required to take the most complicated route to get from point A to point B. The conditional zoning restrictions, I believe, solve all of the issues raised by the objectors except one, the concept that B2B might be expanded. And that's an insufficient grounds for you to deny our application. So I would appreciate approval and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Ackerman. Are there any questions? Mr. Owens? Mr. Aukman, to begin with, in the case or staff's report, there's a statement here that states the rezoning could allow for more intense use of valuable land in the downtown area. And I think that's where everybody's concern is, is, you know, how intense is this property going to get? the map shows the corner of Mill and West High Street and also the corner of Upper and West High Street slated for future expansion. Can you explain that? Can you explain where the church plans to go as far as future expansion and any further intensive use of this land? We have no definite plans. We wanted to show that on the development plan just to make clear the areas that we have, in fact, discussed at various times for possible buildings. The corner of Upper Street and High Street, and as it goes back and affects the actual structures that are built, you see a little stub sticking out there. That is a 1954 children's wing right there. At one time, we contemplated building additional Sunday school rooms on that end, on the upper street side, tearing down the 54 addition and building into part of the front area. At the same time, we recognized that visually, at least so long as High Street is still one way, visually that corner is a very important corner, and we want to keep the viewscape there, as I think the expansion area plan calls things. On the Mill Street corner, we had discussed several years ago possibly building a new sanctuary. In fact, there was a point in time when a new sanctuary had a higher priority among some of the church members than a new fellowship hall. With the onset of the multi-site church campus concept, the drive for a new sanctuary has just fallen away. and the emphasis is now on the Fellowship Hall. I know we're not discussing that as far as a rezoning issue, but I think the possibility of what might take place, and if this additional land is rezoned, then it falls into the possible, excuse me, but commercialization as far as other things. Commercialization, if you don't mind my interrupting, and I apologize, is not possible without coming back for some relief under the conditional zoning restrictions. As far as conditional zoning restrictions, to prevent that commercialization, would the church be opposed to prohibiting the first two uses and the principal uses, maybe three, civic center and convention centers, bank, credit unions, securities, commodity brokers, exchange? You know, those are just commercial buildings to me. We have no objection to, I'm saying this, Reverend, without looking back at you, which I should do, but we have discussed these matters. We have no objection to being zoned against the Civic Center or Convention facilities with the caveat that the United Methodist Church for Kentucky holds its annual convention periodically in Lexington and uses our facilities ancillary to the Civic Center when it does so. So number two, generally speaking, again, as I address Mr. Holmes' question, no problem with prohibiting those, again, with the understanding that there is a United Methodist Credit Union in Kentucky, presently has an office at Park Methodist Church, and is considered to be a church use. So, you know, it's like we discussed with the neighborhood, would you prohibit hospitals? Well, hospitals and medical care have been a traditional outreach of the United Methodist Church. So how do you, I'm happy to go in the direction you're trying to go, but every time I do that, I come up with something that the Methodist Church could be doing in the area. Now, beauty shops you can take out, you know, we can go at some of these. Number one's an easy one. Number two probably would work. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Ockerman while he's at the podium? Thank you, sir. Thank you all. I'm sorry. Mr. Cravens, my apologies. Oh, I'm sorry. If you were to get this fellowship hall, wouldn't that satisfy your needs for a long period of time? Yes, sir, it certainly would because we can address need. We have time during the day on Sunday for additional services if we have more members and need more services. We did a renovation of our sanctuary several years ago to enlarge the choir loft. We have built, in 1984, a new Sunday school wing. By moving the offices, we have freed up former office space for more Sunday school space. Our great hole in completing a modern church plan right now is the antiquated fellowship hall down in the basement with the mental support poles and so forth. So, yes, this would. Thank you. Any other questions for Ms. Copeland? What is the active membership of your church? We have, as I'm trying to recall from last Sunday, we have close to 700 members attending in all services. And what is our membership is around 1,800. So there's how many families? Oh, how many families is that? 800? Probably closer to 1,000. Close to 1,000 families. So what is going to happen? It looks to me like your footprint is going to double just about or almost double with this Fellowship Hall. What's going to happen there in that hall? The Fellowship Hall will have, first of all, we're going to have a basement underneath it for future expansion in that. We don't intend at this point to finish that when built. The Fellowship Hall itself will be a large meeting and dining facility. Large meeting? Meeting. I mean, it'll have a stage. We'll have the ability to set up chairs if the youth want to give a performance of some nature on a stage there that's not appropriate in the sanctuary. It will have tables, chairs, and a new kitchen because we serve meals on Wednesday nights. We serve as a room at the inn location, so we're feeding homeless men once a week during cold weather. We occasionally, as I said, the Methodist Church in Kentucky occasionally will convene in Kentucky and other conference meetings go on. So it's going to be a large dining hall with the ability to convert it to a meeting hall. So if you've got 800 families, do you have 800 parking spaces left over? We have an arrangement on Sundays with PNC Bank to use their double-stack parking garage. The church acquired the parking lot at High and Broadway. We have almost 200 spaces. We'll probably lose about 40 spaces or 50 spaces in this plan. But you know, not every member of a family drives a different car. Families come together when they're coming to church. Parking is always a challenge downtown. But Wednesday nights, absent a U.K. ball game or a concert and Sunday mornings, we find we have adequate parking. And again, we're staggering services and that kind of thing. But it's not on site. It probably overflows into the neighborhood. I don't believe, and Peter, you live right next door, so you can tell me if we impact the neighborhood. When I drive to church on Sunday morning, people are already on the curbs. We park on our lot and across the street when we have a really big demand on Broadway. But I'm talking about the impact that the Fellowship Hall and this 10,000 square foot space will have parking-wise on the critical mass, fragile area around it. We purchased the Broadway property, which has 110 parking spaces, knowing that we would be displacing less than that number when we built the Fellowship Hall. So we've already taken action to replace the spaces we'll lose. And that's over on Broadway, you say? It's a parking lot at High and Broadway that is catacornered to the high end. So we have that area for parking. We've already taken steps to more than replace the parking we'll lose. And these are people who are coming to church anyway. So adding the fellowship hall is not going to add impact. We're serving our existing members. Thank you very much. Any other questions? for Mr. Ackerman? Thank you sir. Okay thank you. Citizen rebuttal Mr. Cassidy we'll start with you if that's okay. Thank you let me just mention a couple of things. One of the concerns definitely was parking Madam Commissioner just to mention it to you the there is concern with the increased Fellowship Hall footprint that there would be a lack of parking, but as Mr. R. Aukerman has mentioned, there is a corner lot at the corner of South Broadway and West High that is not used very frequently now, I don't think, for the congregation, but they do have an arrangement with the PNC Bank across the street that they use. But in any event, by way of a little bit of background, when this first came up, the issue, I think one of the reasons why the church chose to use the broad brush at the beginning was that there were several other things on the table, which included the West High and South Broadway lot. and that's why we had some discussions about that. So that's always something that the neighborhood is very concerned about, which brings me back to this point about hard cases making bad law, as you sometimes hear, and why we don't have all the tools available to us to make everybody happy. And the fact of the matter is that the laws are what they are, and if, in fact, it is not possible, as I'm not sure that there is unequivocal testimony today that it is not possible to get a variance in conditional use to get this project done. But if it's not possible, then perhaps it should be possible so that we don't see the increase of B2B zoning into our residential neighborhoods, which, as you've heard from many people tonight and many neighborhood associations and many other associations that represent far more than 1,800 people, that this is a bad idea for the reasons that we've talked about. The other option I think that hasn't been discussed that I'd like to mention a couple things. One is Foster had talked about a consolidation of the lots. Just for your all's education, and I'm sure Foster will remember all this, these all used to be lots. This Rokeby Hall lot is not a consolidated part of the church lot. There was another residential lot right next to it, just like that, and then another one that came off of West High, another one off of West High, and so on and so forth. We had two others over here on the corner. The church, through the years, has gradually acquired all these properties, and just as they've done here, as they've acquired these properties, these are the last three properties that they acquired. I think maybe 25 years or so ago, an effort was made to consolidate, is that right, Foster, in the early 80s, perhaps? all of the lots were consolidated by the church that they had acquired through the years, including some of these lots here that allowed them access to Max Alley. These lots, these three lots, have been acquired afterwards. If this entire lot was consolidated, and I'm sure Mr. Emmons is so good at correcting me, can correct me again if I am wrong, but if we consolidate all those lots, as it's been indicated by the church that they intend to do, then I'm not sure exactly where the lot size requirement really plays out. And again, if I'm wrong, Mr. Emmons can come and correct me, as he is very good at doing. The other issue is, as I mentioned, we have B2B zoning that runs parallel to West High Street, and then the properties, the R4 buffer zone, and then the three R2s. As I've mentioned before, I'm still not sure why this needs to be B2B in order to do the fellowship hall over here that impacts the back of these two lots. I mentioned that and I'll mention it again, other than for convenience of future planning. But the point I was trying to make was if the entire church property had a petition to be rezoned to another zone, I'm not sure if, Mr. Emmons, if that was something that was discussed in the early planning processes. In other words, if we abandon this B2B zone that is so distasteful to so many neighborhoods and just have the entire lot to be rezoned, some other uniform zone, perhaps that would be an option that would allow the church to do what it is that they need to do. So I'd like to mention those two things. First, the consolidation of all the lots that has been done by the church over the years, which is why you see the very many different zones that they have in this overall consolidated lot, as well as the idea of not just rezoning the R4 and R2 properties to match the B2B property, but I think it would be, and again, Mr. Emmons can correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect that there is a zone that is much more in conformance with the downtown master plan than B2B for the entire church property. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cassidy. Any other rebuttal comment from those that spoke earlier? Yes, sir, Mr. Rowland. Thank you very much. I wanted to just make one or two very quick comments. First of all, as regards to downtown master plan, I walked through our neighborhood with Dirhu Tadani, with whom I had worked both on the college town plan and also on the U.K. plan. And he, at that time, and as I read the downtown master plan, now believed that we do not want to encourage downtown uses beyond where they currently are. In other words, we need to maintain the boundary. The other thing I was going to mention is just the question of precedence. All the B2B lots now face, the whole length of High Street now face onto High Street. If you start to grant B2B zone to lots that now are on the north-south streets of Upper Street and Mill Street, you're setting a precedent, I think, that's very dangerous. I think that's the reason that so many of us are down here, not just from the South Hill, but actually from all the historic neighborhoods. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Rowland. Okay, we will close this portion of the public portion of the hearing, and I will turn it over to the commission for further discussion, comment. I think you have staff has recommended approval as annotated on the blue sheet. With that approval, they have offered up their reasons for that approval, along with conditional zoning and prohibited uses for this application. I believe Zoning Committee has recommended approval as well of this application. And at this time, the Chair will entertain any comment or motion. Mr. Brewer? Yeah, I'm still struggling with this. The weight and the arguments that are being made by the neighborhood associations to me resonate immensely. However, I don't want to dissuade the church from growing. I think that if the tools aren't currently available to let them do what they want to do without encroaching on the neighborhood, or the expansion of the B2B zone into the neighborhood, then I'd like to see what options are available to change those before we move down a path that I think breaks with that barrier. Don't know if that's possible or not. Thank you, Mr. Brewer. I believe I'm going to ask staff. I think today is the day we have to take action on this. Is that correct? Did the times run out on us? Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? Yes, Ms. Richardson. I would like a clarification just to make sure I heard it correctly from Jimmy regarding the, Mr. Cassidy just said that he thought maybe there was some other zone that would be more appropriate. Did I not hear you say that you all had been through that and this was the most restrictive zone? Yeah. Yeah, I can't think of any other possibility to do what's being proposed today. Mr. Penn? Jimmy, while you're there, granting the B2B on Mill Street or on Upper Street, is that a precedent-setting situation? I don't think so. So, you know, precedent is always a hard thing to get up and argue because as soon as you say, yes, it is, then it'll be in the minutes and everybody will use it. Honestly, I don't. I think whenever you look at the facts of this case, this particular property does have, with Brokeby Hall and Max Alley, that provides that boundary and that buffer. If you look at the fact that this site is currently zoned historic and with the proposed conditional zoning restrictions, I think you would have to take into account all of the factors that make this development unique and that led to this recommendation. And they would have to be the same for it to be at precedent anywhere else. Would consolidation of those plots at the time of rezoning, would that make sense? I would have to think through that with Bill and Tom. I can't answer that right up here at the podium. I can't think of all of the different iterations of what the consequences of that would be. Could you do that in a minute or two? We can certainly try. So you want to be clear, you would be looking at the consolidation to occur prior to, in between. Or in conjunction with the zone change. In conjunction with the zone change. I think that gives some comfort to the neighborhood, and that's just my thinking. I think that gives some comfort to them. Whether it's enough comfort to them or not, I don't know. If it's possible, I'd like to consider it. If it's not, I'd like to know why we couldn't. My gut reaction, and I will go back and talk with Bill and Tom and discuss that. My gut reaction is that we try to avoid split zone pieces of property to begin with because it gets us in weird situations. It's a slippery slope, but I'm just trying to think of something we could do here to ensure the fact that we're trying to preserve the integrity of the neighborhood. We will go back and put our heads together. Thank you. Ms. Phillips? While you guys are putting your heads together about that issue, can I ask you to think about another issue? Yes, ma'am. Can you search for me? I would love to know what the comprehensive plan says about expansion of uses in historic districts. Expansion of uses in historic districts. Expansion of uses within historic districts. See whether or not that's covered. I know that we speak in several areas about maintaining the integrity of our historic neighborhoods. But I don't remember specifically if there's a bullet point that speaks to an expansion of a use within a historic area. We'll look for that also. What I'd like to do is if we could take a five-minute break while staff has an opportunity to look that up. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We don't think we're the strangest, but not like the crowd, we don't talk about our attitudes. We don't think there's much to have about coming from a place of red land. And we don't care what your good kids say. We're not going to sell out a bourgeois way. We don't think there's much to have about coming from a place of red land. And we don't think we're the strangest kids around. I don't know. It's hard to tune to. W-L-U-V Radio. It's got a pro-life market and the product is free. And whether you think you'll like it or not, we'll tune in. It's commercial free radio at then. And everyone turn your ears to the left of the dial. It's music for the audio file. And everyone else can learn to fit into our club. Our listeners get to freely talk And no one will ever turn off their haters again But love is gonna suck them in We don't think we're the stranger's kids around I'll see you next time. This is the first time I'm going to be able to do this. Thank you. Never turn up there is again Come on, look at that. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh Thank you. Oh, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You are religious From all these riots In the streets I wish that I could go away And the love is so warm On the earth What's your soul sure of you? WTO A false economy Come into your home Take my money Come into your home Music I like to dig out on the beast of the land and then I like to dig out on some Oreos. The feast is coming and a brand new day with me. Walk with Jehovah on the streets of gold. Diamond rings. All my bling bling. My bossy of comrades. Our water box. Our summer house on the beer day club. To win some dreams and give them gifts to our mates All the services they provide to us We're the best We are famous, our lives are so fruitful Our bank accounts, our bank accounts are so full and so cool Put some money in the hedge fund Baby, and we'll straddle the skis up to the speedboat Baby, understand some genius on the quality theater Especially a grip for our home I'm not in large crowds I look down to see where you are I want you to lie I have a good call Thank you. Jimmy, are you ready to respond to our commission's questions? Okay. Thank you for the few minutes' time to put our heads together, and I do have a few graphics that I think will help explain our answers to the commission's questions. The first graphic is the existing zoning and the lots. This lot here, which has the two residential structures on it, which on the development plan, it's at the corner of Max Alley. There are two attached buildings there. One of them has two units in it, and I believe the other one has four units in it. It is on this one lot that is zoned R2. That is the key non-conforming piece that makes this zone change necessary. as we look on how to do this zone change under our existing tools. That R2 lot cannot be, under our existing regulations, cannot be consolidated to the rest of the church property because it will increase its nonconformity. Unlike the R3 and the R4 zones where you can have group residential projects and things of that nature, multiple buildings on one lot, the R2 does not have such a provision. The lot itself cannot get smaller to allow for the fellowship expansion because of the minimum lot size of the R2 zone of 7,500 square feet. This lot is either at or very close to that. There's also the nonconforming uses. And if we can get the aerial photograph on that, and if we can even get in a little bit tighter on that lot. There we go. So you can see it's a little bit fuzzy on this, but there are the two buildings right here and the parking that's in the rear. Currently, you've got a nonconforming use. You've got nonconforming parking on the lot. By consolidating that lot, not only are you making it, you can't make the lot smaller because it increases the nonconformity. You can't take it to the rest of the property because of that. And if you were to just get rid of the parking, then you would be increasing the nonconformity of the nonconformity. All of these things, our entire zoning ordinance is built around not increasing in any nonconformities. With that being said, I do want to offer to the commission, in kind of the spirit of what you were asking, Mr. Penn, about consolidation, I do believe that if the Commission wanted to and the applicant agreed, I believe that you could put a note on this final development plan that it is the intent to consolidate these properties if the zoning is granted by the Council or something I'm trying to come up with the language on the fly, but some sort of note about the intent of consolidation of the property should it be rezoned B2B. That way that would raise a flag and then they would, whenever they came back in for a final development plan, that note would be right on there. And you know us, notes that are out of the ordinary, we bring them to your attention. That would be one possible way to kind of get at least the spirit of the question that you were asking. I hope my explanation is explained why there's not a variance. Also, you cannot grant a variance to the lot size. That's when you have to go for a zone change. Part of the reason for that is Kentucky State Law, KRS 100, does not allow the Board of Adjustment or the Planning Commission to grant a variance that would increase density. That's the reason why you need to go for a zone change if you're going to increase density go through those proper channels. If that satisfactorily answers the questions about the nonconformities and variances for the Commission, I'll go on to the historic preservation and the comprehensive plan. Mayor Redekop, Chair of the Commission.: Does that answer your question, Mr. Penn? Okay, thank you. I mostly want to focus on two parts of our comprehensive plan. Goal 5, which is to protect and preserve Fayette County's significant historic and cultural heritage. Objective A, the number one objective there is to use our long-range preservation plan as a resource to assist in balancing development and protecting and enhancing Fayette County's historic and cultural resources. This was the guiding principle that the staff had during our recommendation. If we can go on to the text a little bit further. I'm not going to read everything to you here, but historic and architecturally significant buildings are also an important part of the urban character and they create a unique place to live and work. A well-planned community incorporates both the new and the historic, a balance that attracts businesses, residents, tourists who seek the unique physical and cultural environment. That the comprehensive plan, and I think correctly so, recommends the balance in our historic areas between new development and protecting our historic resources. If you have any more questions for me, I'd be happy to try and answer them. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Phillips. On that first graphic, Barb, with the goals and objectives, which you read to us, spoke to the long-range preservation plan? What is that? Bill? I'm not familiar with that term. I'm sorry, but I'm not. Is that a historic preservation office term? Do they have a... I'm looking for any help here. I'm simply not familiar with that term. I can say that I'm not familiar with that. I've served both on the BOAR as well as planning commission close to a decade, and I'm not familiar with that. I don't think the term is as important as the sentiment behind it of using those for balancing the development. Okay, any other? Ms. Phillips, does that answer your question prior to break? Absent of the term? Okay. I'm just asking if it answered her question. She said it did, so. It's the best answer I've got. Okay. Any other questions for Jimmy? Jimmy, thank you for researching that information. Okay. Any other comments? Discussion? Mr. Chairman, Mr. Owens. I would suggest that I tried to mention to Jimmy on that earlier graphic was, you know, I hate to admit that perhaps the neighborhood made a mistake back 10 years ago when it rezoned from R4 to R2, but what if those two properties on the corner of South Upper Max Alley, Jimmy, were actually R4 rather than R2, and then were consolidated into the entire lot, would that satisfy the minimum lot size requirements requirements that you were focusing on as far as the R2 zone is concerned. Would the commission want to, sure Jimmy, go ahead, you can respond to that. It's an electrifying day. Now I've lost my train of thought because of that. The lot size, if it were to be rezoned to R4, your lot size, you would have a little bit more flexibility of going from 7,500 square feet to 6,000 square feet. I don't know if it would be enough to do what the applicant is proposing. I think you would still have an issue of nonconforming parking. I don't think that the parking that's on that little piece of property right now would conform with the number of units that are on there today. And then also if you were to go from 7,500 down, if you were able to shave some of that lot off, the only place to shave it off is at the parking lot. And so I'm positive that even if it did rezone R4, that you would have a kind of a parking problem with that. Thank you, Jimmy. Okay. Any other comment? Is there a motion from the Commission? Mr. Chairman, the question of possibly adding a note to the plan with regard to consolidation has been raised. I just wanted to respond by saying we would be agreeable to that if that is what the commission desired. Thank you, Ms. Hockman. Okay. Mr. Pignetto. Yeah, that would help me. I'd rather consolidate them and say we can't. I'd rather put the note on there and then with the historic overlay, that gives me about as much comfort as I think I'm going to get here today. Because a historic overlay protects what you can do on that piece of property and helps mitigate what the B2B could do otherwise. Okay. Is there any further comment? Is there a motion? I think there's been some discussion about if there is a motion for status recommendation, there's been some discussion about additional prohibited uses and I know I would like to see on the conditional uses items 6 and 8 I believe on that page. I think the petitioner said he was amenable to adding conditional use items 6 and 8. I know there may have been some discussion about others but Yeah, I'd like to see if we could narrow those conditional uses down to, you know, in addition to the historic overlay and shrinking the conditional uses down, not to a single use, but to as small as we can possibly get it. That's about the best I see we can do on this. I'm getting both sides, protecting the character, integrity of the neighborhood, and yet allowing the church to do what they want to do. Jimmy, you had something? there were four items from my notes from the Commission discussion that were talked about and I've highlighted them in pink to the principal permitted uses number one and two which was this Civic Center and convention facilities and the second one the banks credit agencies and then as you mentioned number six and eight which I believe the the drive-through facilities and the recycling as conditional uses I've compiled this piece of paper with the staffs proposed prohibited uses and I've highlighted the ones that have been discussed by the Commission thus far we'll be happy to assist you in any way in your decision. Thank you, Jimmy. Mr. Chairman, or if I may, Jimmy, you were talking about principal uses. Can we include number 13, hotels and motels? Once again, from the staff's perspective, we would not have a problem with that. I don't know what the applicant's feelings on that would be. We'll be happy to also highlight those as up for discussion. Basically, any of them that you wanted to prohibit, the staff is not going to have a problem with that until we get down to the point where we only have such limited uses left on the property that it really becomes impractical to do anything other than one or two uses on there. You would like to discourage us from getting to that point? I would like to discourage you from prohibiting too much, but at the same time, I'm not trying to talk out of both sides of my mouth. I don't think that the staff has any problem being very restrictive on this. The applicant, at the same time, may or may not agree to all of those. I'm not trying to jump in here, but it has been successful in the past that perhaps we could go, if this is kind of what you want to do, we could go through and highlight all of the ones that the commission would like to discuss. And then you could make a decision on those as they go. If the commission wanted to do that, we would certainly. I think you've highlighted, I know, one and two and six and eight. I mean, how many more? I heard the hotels and motels mentioned. Yeah. All right. Okay. Hotels and motels. You've got number 16 marked out there. Is there a reason for that? It's already marked out. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Ockerman, did you have something you wanted to add? Consistent with the discussion, I want to just let you know we have no objection to principal uses one, two, or 13, nor any objection to conditional uses 6 and 8. And I'd just like the record to satisfy my concerns about things that Methodist Church does, so long as we all understand that the principal use is for church purposes. If we have a church convention or if we temporarily house somebody, we're not going against what we're doing here today. Exactly. Thank you. Okay, any further discussion on the prohibited uses of conditions only? Is there a motion? Mr. Chairman, do we have the wording for that additional note that Mr. Penn was requesting? I don't believe. Do you have that, Jimmy? Rather than specific language at this time, I believe the commission could just on the development plan, just an additional condition that the intent to consolidate be placed in a note, and then the staff and the applicant will work that out prior to certification. Okay. And that could be on the zoning development plan? On the zoning development plan would be the appropriate place to put that condition. Okay. All right. So first item of business, zoning map amendment request. Mr. Chairman, I'll attempt. I'll move for approval of MAR 2008-31 as staff recommended with their reasons and the conditional zoning restrictions as listed, also including under Section 819 B, principal uses prohibiting number one, civic center and convention facilities, number two, banks, credit agencies, and number 13, hotels and motels. And then also, as far as conditional uses, number six, drive-thru facilities for sales of goods or products, and number eight, recycling drop-off centers for aluminum, steel, paper glass, et cetera. I have got to stop touching the microphone. You have another comment? And based on the record today, you feel that those are appropriate for the same reasons listed in the Stafford? Yes, yes, and I would also include adding a note to the development plan as Mr. Simmons. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. That's right. That's on the development plan. Okay. We have a motion and a second. is ready for question. Mr. Cravens. Did you say number 13? Yes sir as far as hotels and motels prohibiting. Okay we have a motion and a second. All those in favor of the motion please signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed please say no. No. Can we take a poll? Mr. Holmes Mr. Richardson I'm sorry Ms. Whitman Ms. Whitman Mr. Penn Mr. Owens Mr. Phillips Mr. Cravens Ms. Copeland Mr. Brewer. Mr. Vaughan. Yes. Eight yes, two no. Thank you. Motion carries. Thank you. If we have the zoning development plan. Mr. Chairman, I'll move for approval of ZDP 2008-147, First United Methodist Church, as recommended with the requirements, 10 requirements with number 11 to add a note on the development plan as Mr. Emmons has suggested. Okay, and we also have note 12 on the conditional zoning for the... That would be your typical practice. And adding note 12 for conditional zoning? Yes. Okay. Did I hear a second? Motion and second to approve ZDP 2008-147. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, please say no. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. What we want. Okay. We don't want it. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Saile. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Members of the Commission, good afternoon. The next item appears on page 3 of your agenda. This is MAR 2009-4, a zone change request by Club Facilities, LLC. This appears on page 3 of your agenda. And for just a moment, if I could, I'd like to refer you to the sheet of paper just in front of tab number 3 in your notebooks. Also, we have a diagram to put on the overhead for you. We distributed a letter to you at the start of today's meeting from the attorney for the applicant requesting that a portion of this request be withdrawn. The portion requested for withdrawal is 3244 and 3248 Lansdowne Drive. Those are the two lots closest to the intersection of Raven that are crosshatched in the exhibit. The applicant would, I think, like the Commission to consider acceptance of their request to withdraw those two lots from this request at this time. Thank you, Mr. Solley. Mr. Simpson? That's request. I agree with that request, Mr. Chairman, since I made it. And if you would withdraw, we'd like to withdraw that. It's not necessary for our case. We get a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move that we withdraw 3248 and 3244 from the zone request. Okay, we have a motion and a second to withdraw address 3244 and 3248, Lansdowne from MAR 2009-4. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, please say no. Motion carries. Thank you. This amended zone change application seeks a rezoning from an R1B single-family residential zone to a requested B1 neighborhood business zone for three-tenths of an acre, and from another single-family residential R1C zone to a B1 zone neighborhood business, now for 1.86 net acres and 2.22 gross acres. The total acreage involved with this amended request on the net side is 2.17 net acres and 2.68 gross acres. The subject property is located very near the intersection, as I mentioned, of Raven Road and Lansdowne Drive. Lansdowne is a collector street that has a signalized intersection with Tates Creek Road heading north and south. This is a short distance north of the interchange at New Circle Road, signalized intersections at Malibu Drive and Dove Run Road. The next signalized intersection north of Dove Run is the traffic signal at Lansdowne Drive. This property is less than a quarter of a mile west of that location and as amended includes almost the entirety of 3256 Lansdowne Drive, which is the primary location for the Signature Club, which has been there a number of years, and before that the Lansdowne Club, a private club for swimming and tennis. It also includes a very small portion of 3300 Lansdowne Drive. That is a rear lot where most of the recreational facilities for the club are located. The primary zone change is for B1, requested of those two single-family residential zones, B1, of course, neighborhood business. Most of the remaining property is R1C, as is property to the north, east, and south of this location. There is some R1B property immediately to the west of the subject property, including, as I mentioned, three-tenths of an acre of the subject property. Homes along Brook Hill Drive contain R1B zoning, as do other properties further to the south and west along Lansdowne Drive. The petitioner is asking for B1 zoning at this location in order to expand the allowable use for the club, primarily related to the restaurant use. They wish to have the restaurant available not just for club members, but also for the general public. The club facility is currently approved as a conditional use in the R1C zone, and that is the reason for which the zone change is being requested. The adjoining neighborhood is, as the zoning indicates, almost entirely single-family residential. There is one exception. A few of the properties along Raven Road, closest to Tates Creek Road, are zoned R2, And there is a mixture of single-family and duplex uses on this portion of Raven Road closest to Tate's Creek. Immediately to the south and east is the Lansdowne Shopping Center. We have a few photos to show you of this time to show the club's proximity to the nearby residents and also to the shopping center. This is a view looking from the east, from Tates Creek Road along Lansdowne Drive. The club property is here. They own four properties, two of which I've mentioned, 3,300 and 3,256, in addition to two smaller lots which were just withdrawn for consideration earlier. The property is developed for parking in this area closest to the intersection of Raven and Lansdowne and what I have called in the staff report the lower parking lot, the more historical parking lot for the club, this location. There's a creek that traverses this area and a heavy tree stand along a steep slope area that separates the club from the residences along Brook Hill Drive. The new club facility is centrally located here, as are the pool, tennis, and basketball courts to the rear of the property. This is a little closer view of the property, looking from the south. Again, we have Lansdowne Drive here, Raven Road here. This is the intersection with Zandale Drive, which extends in this direction toward Nicholasville Road much distant to the west. This is a view looking from the west. The homes here are on Brook Hill. There's a large hill coming down, Lansdowne, and then the club is on the right as you approach Tates Creek Road. And then finally a photo from the north showing the subject property, the front of the signature club building, the original parking lot, which was redone a few years ago to accommodate the expansion, as well as the new parking lot here, which is zoned R1C and is to remain R1C. The 2007 comprehensive plan recommends semi-public land use for the entirety of the subject property. Hates Creek Road, Lansdowne Drive, Lansdowne Shopping Center is here shown for retail trade. The club is just to the north and west of that location and is recommended for semi-public land use. We distributed to you as the one staff exhibit the text from the conference of plan that describes semi-public land uses. They are large and distinctive facilities that are usually service-oriented. They can include private recreation uses, such as this property and its historic use. Existing semi-public uses on the plan are identified as that use, and this is an indication of their desire, comprehensive plan's desire for their continual use and service to the nearby community. The staff has viewed this zone change under the comprehensive plan recommendations, and as we've discovered in some recent zone change hearings, the plan does call for local business opportunities, such as that being requested now by the club. but only when the expansion does not negatively impact the nearby residential area. In the staff's review of this application, we find it significant that no improvements are now proposed for the club property, and that, we believe, will greatly impact the impact of any business rezoning for an expanded restaurant use here upon the nearby neighborhood. Originally, as we told you three weeks ago at your zoning committee meeting, the staff felt there was too much property being requested for B-1 zoning, and we did recommend disapproval of the two lots that were withdrawn earlier at this hearing. But still, the lower parking lot, if re-zone B-1, can satisfy the club's needs for the restaurant use, leaving the upper lot available for the private membership use of the club in an R-1 zone. originally the staff recommended disapproval of the two properties that have been withdrawn of course that's no longer applicable the portion of the rezoning request that remains the staff is recommending approval as has your zoning committee of the portions of 3256 and 3300 lands down drive for these reasons the neighborhood business zone requested is in substantial agreement with the comprehensive plan and is appropriate for a portion of the signature club's property. And in staff finding number one, it would be appropriate to change Lansdowne Club to signature club in finding number one. We would ask that you make that one word change. The club and its restaurant meet the plan's definition for a semi-public use under item A. Under item B, the existing structure has been more recently modified to accommodate an expanded use. Under C, the restricted B1 zone would allow the club's restaurant to serve more residents within the community. And finally, the goals and objectives of the plan do encourage local business expansion, but not at the detriment of nearby neighborhoods. Our recommendation is made subject to the development plan that's before you that will be presented to you in just a moment. The staff is recommending conditional zoning restrictions, as appear on the bottom of page 3 of the agenda and also on page 4 of the staff report. These restrictions have been offered by the applicant, and they will limit future B1 use of the property to the existing structure and less than 10 other uses allowable for the property. These are the only uses the applicant is proposing be allowed if this property is B1. Signage restrictions are also proposed as appear on the staff report in the agenda. These have been offered by the applicant and are necessary to protect the established residential neighborhood in this area. Before the development plan is presented, I'd be glad to answer any questions about the staff report for this application. Thank you, Bill. Any questions? Mr. Owens? Thank you. As far as $3,300, you're saying just a portion is recommended for a zone change? Maybe on the aerial, can you show that? Yes, sir. It is a very small piece of that property. Again, to orient you, this is Lansdowne Drive, Raven Road here, Zandale Drive here. Four lots, one, two, three, and four. There is five hundredths of an acre this portion of 3,300 lands down that is still part of the zone change. It's about one or two parking spaces. It's in the parking lot? Yes, sir, according to the aerial photo. Thank you. Any other questions for Bill? I did have a question. I'm going to jump ahead. You said there are no expansion plans to the facility as of this application. MR. Physical expansion. MR. Physical expansion. In the future, should there be a physical expansion, we would see it like we would any other amendment to a development plan. Is that correct? MR. I think that's correct, yes, sir. That if this restriction is adopted, that would require not only an amended development plan but also a requested zone change to modify the conditional zoning. MR. Conditional zoning. Okay. Great. Thank you. Any other questions for Bill? Thank you sir. Thank you. Mr. Martin. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, at the top of page 4 is the final development plan that is associated with this sum change, ZDP 2009-15 Lansdowne Club property. As Mr. Sally oriented you earlier, here is Lansdowne Drive, Raven Road. Here is the existing facility. Here are the recreational facilities that exist with the pool, the bathhouse, and the associated other recreational facilities. The lower parking lot and of course the upper parking lot. You can see access here to Raven Road, access here to Lansdowne Drive. The circular drive here as exists when originally proposed, and this is a slightly revised plan that you see before you today. You may recall they were going to put some parking in these areas. They've removed that parking. There are two parallel spaces there. They have adjusted their membership number down to meet the required parking of a private club. They do meet the parking for the proposed use. They are right on. It's 179 spaces. That's what they're proposing. Up in this area, they have some compact spaces for the area for the membership to park. And again, as Bill stated, this area would be the parking lot for the public that would be utilizing the facility. This development plan has no physical changes proposed other than a slight change in that parking, which is not a physical change so much as a striping. There are 15 conditions. The largest reason for that, it is a final development plan, and that requires a few more sign-offs and a little more scrutiny. I think the good news for the applicant is because there are no changes being proposed, it should not lengthen their time or create any difficulties in getting the plan certified and reviewed by the appropriate staff. The remaining conditions other than those sign-off conditions are cleanup conditions. This plan, because of line weights, the amount of easements, the floodplain, and that sort of thing, there was some difficulty originally in reading the plan. And much of what you see there is just a request to make that very clear so it's easily to discern what those issues are. And again, here's the floodplain which covers much of the property. There are easements you can see that run through here. And we're just wanting to be sure that they are absolutely accurately depicted. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Thank you, Mr. Martin. Mr. Holmes? I have one, Mr. Martin. Number 15, does this parking drive the membership or membership? determines the parking, and how do we ultimately know what the membership is going to be? The requirement placed on the club was a space per four members, so the membership does drive the parking requirement, as does the proposed use drive its parking requirement as well. And we have 15 on there, and we wanted it on there because they are at the minimum. They are meeting exactly what they need to satisfy those two requirements. They wouldn't be able to grow their membership then. No, they will not, not unless they find a way to do something about the parking. Thank you. Any other questions for Tom? Thank you, sir. Petitioner? Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. I'm Bruce Simpson. Tom Martin reminded me before I came up here that brevity was the soul of wit. I note on your agenda that, and it's been a while since I've been down here, but you now have a 30-minute rule on the applicant's presentation. It's called the Simpson rule. I'm thinking, whoa. I really like this microphone. 30 minutes. Okay. I'm going to give it my best shot. I'm down here today on behalf of Club Facilities. The club facilities has two principal owners, Troy Turner, who is here with me today, and Ron Turner, who was not able to be here today. The staff has set forth the evidentiary basis upon which you can approve this zone change, and we are in complete agreement with the staff's analysis and the staff's recommendations and the conditional zoning provisions, which we offered, and the conditions on the development plan. All of those things we are in complete concurrence with. We have at the outset, to let you know, because it came up at the subdivision committee meeting on zoning, the neighborhood association, the Lansdowne Neighborhood Association, has actively been involved as this case has unfolded and gone through the machinations that any kind of zone change case goes through before the planning commission. They are here today and to represent to you. You'll hear from their representative shortly their endorsement and approval of our zone change application. We're pleased, obviously, that we were able to reach that agreement. There will be one or two objectors, which is to be expected, I think, in any kind of a case. But as the staff has pointed out to you, with respect to this property, in terms of its configuration. We're not adding anything. In fact, in terms of the physical facilities, physical structure, unlike most zone changes, if you were to drive by tomorrow and it's rezoned, you wouldn't notice any difference because we're not asking for anything new or different. We're just simply asking that the clubhouse facility be made available to the public as well as one of the parking lots. That's brought about by necessity. In order to keep the club functioning. As most of you probably are aware who've lived in Lexington any length of time, this club dates back to the mid-50s. It was formed by the original developers of the Lansdowne Club, J.W. Davis and C.B. McKeachin. It was the first structure built in the subdivision, so it predates all of the houses. Mr. Davis and Mr. McKeachin operated the club up until the 90s, and they sold it. It was actually becoming somewhat of a stress sale, there were several people interested in purchasing their property, the Fraternal Order of Police, other organizations. One of the former members of the club bought it, Mr. Varney, tried to make a go of it, but quickly saw that he was going to have to put in a substantial amount of money to upgrade the property to make it marketable to people in today's climate in terms of the existing competition with private clubs in the area. As you probably also know, private clubs, there is some level of difficulty in being successful, and ours is no different, unfortunately. When the Turners bought this property in 2005, they leveled everything on the property and started brand new. The initial budget was to spend $3 million, and when I represented them in 2005 before the Board of Adjustment for a conditional use permit, it was $3.5 million. And after completion, they spent $9 million. It is a fantastic facility. Just to give you a brief overview of what it looked like at the time it was purchased and what it looks like now, if Barbara could go through the photographs. I need to dim the lights. This was the club as it existed. This is the rear portion of the club where the patio is in May of 2005. And just go through those quickly if you would, Barb. This was the pool house where people changed in swim gear, swimsuits for families. It was a one-story facility. This was part of the, those blue feature there helped secure the tarpaulin that covered the pool. And you can see there was breaks in the concrete. The The pool was leaking thousands of gallons a week and needed substantial repair. This was the main upstairs area where banquets, receptions, meetings were held. This is a shot from the back end. There was a wooden deck leading out from the banquet area, short deck, and the patio. The property was completely leveled in September of 2005 and in May of 2006, this was what was built in its place. And again, Barb, if you just go through there very quickly, I have these slides in your green notebook. This is a shot of the rear of the property. aerial shot showing the front toward Lansdowne Drive and the pool in the back. You can see the pool house on the left. This is, that's okay. This comes up a little dark on the screen but I think the next slide will show you the improvements that we've made in the, this is the downstairs area where the restaurant is. and the bar, sushi bar, part of the restaurant dining facilities. The pool house is two stories now and they added a very extensive weight training treadmill. They have a trainer up there. I show you this shot simply to the juxtaposition of the Lansdowne Club is nestled in here in this parcel in the neighborhood. But right behind it, of course, is Lansdowne Shopping Center. Raven Road is here, as Bill pointed out before, and then the remainder of the Lansdowne Neighborhood Association is surrounding it. This is a and that's all the photographs I think. Thank you, Barb. Historically, this has been a challenged piece of property to develop because as the staff has pointed out to you, a significant portion is in the floodplain. So it's really, it's only future use is what it is today, is a recreational facility, a recreational amenity for the neighborhood. It's been this way for over 50 years. Our intent is to keep it for another 50 years. The only other potential really viable option would be to tear all of this investment down and put in some single-family houses, which would hardly be practical or worthwhile and wasteful. So this is an unusual case because typically you don't see applicants come before a neighborhood or even the Planning Commission and simply say that they've made every effort, they've hired every consultant to make it function for the membership. Unfortunately, the restaurant business is very competitive, and people like variety, and they don't like to keep going to the same thing all the time. And after the first year, the club was able to pay its expenses in terms of the restaurant, But in 2007 and 2008, they struggled to the tune of $35,000 a month in lost money. So, again, I can represent to you that every known restaurant management consultant that knew anything about making it work was retained. But when you have a limited amount of people that you can draw upon, that's a major constraint in this market. So in November of 2008, Troy Turner called up the neighborhood representatives and said, you know, I've got a problem here. We want to keep the club successful. We want to maintain the high quality. We want the neighborhood to be involved in it, as it has in the past. But we need some help in understanding our situation in that we need to open the restaurant and the banquet facility upstairs to be made available to the public. Now let me add one parenthetical comment here. The reality of this club is, dating back to the 50s, is that it has always been open to the public. It just hasn't been advertised as such. But I went over there many times. There was a fictional $5 a year, a $10 a year membership fee, but anybody could go in there and dine, dance on the weekends if you wanted to do so. Same thing with the rental of the upstairs for banquets and parties and receptions and fundraisers, et cetera. So actually what we're doing here is making legitimate the practice that took place many years ago, but it's not changing any of the uses. We're simply making it, giving the club the opportunity to be successful, to maintain the high quality. And I think after the negotiations and meetings we've had with the neighbors, they realize the importance that this club has to their neighborhood, that it has become a community asset, a neighborhood asset of some significance, though they did have some concerns. And those concerns principally related to precedent, what kind of precedent would we be creating here? What about parking when there are some instances five or six times a year where there's overflow parking and people that visit the Lansdowne Club park on the public streets? Principally, this is when we have swim meets two or three times a year. There's excess parking when grandma and grandpa and the brothers and sisters and everybody comes and wants to see their family member swim. We have some excess parking issues. And the traffic, obviously, that would go with that. These issues are not new. They have existed with the Lansdowne Club since it was built. If you may recall, the bash used to be held there after the first U.K. football game. Thousands of people would come to that. It's not there anymore. They've moved elsewhere. But basically, you may hear conflicting evidence about how many times a year this happens. We're suggesting it happens six, usually for a five-hour period of time at the most. That's 30 hours a year. That's less than three thousandths of 1% of 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Even if you doubled it, it's still a fractional amount of time. But obviously to the people that live on Raven Road, which you'll probably hear from some of those folks today, that's an issue. We've come up with a proposal to attempt to address that issue. In fact, we tried to address that issue when the Lansdowne Club and the Signature Club first opened in May of 2006. Troy Turner went out and put a sign up near the entrance to the Signature Club and said, if you're coming to visit the Signature Club, please park in our parking lot, see our valet, don't park on Raven. Apparently, you have to have permission from the city to post such a sign, and he was instructed to take the sign down. And we did. We have offered valet service in the past on certain instances and shuttle bus services during swim meets. we will say that there have been some communication inconsistencies where we didn't coordinate what was going on with the restaurant and the banquet and the swim meet as we should. And had we been able to get those uses together, then we could have had the valet service and the shuttle service there to deal with those situations. Again, we're talking about six times a year, roughly. and with the agreement we've worked out with the neighborhood in terms of restrictive covenants. Now I know you all aren't involved in those, but they have an attorney. We've worked these out. These are covenants that run with the land, and we've got a system in place to deal with overflow situations in terms of having a designated coordinator to deal with these events ahead of time and to try to discourage as much as possible people from parking on the public streets. The neighborhood can talk about that if they wish, but we believe we've made a serious commitment to that extent. The other provisions, we talked about precedent. You know, this property has always had these uses. Nothing has changed. We're just confirming, affirming the uses in terms of the public being able to use them. Nothing more and nothing less. So this property, unlike other properties in the area, you couldn't find that is there a house somewhere in Lansdowne that's currently operating like we are with some other different kind of use. Well, no, none that I'm aware of. No other property that I'm aware of in the community has a 50-year uninterrupted continuous use of the kind that we're talking about today. We've had a conditional use. It's gone on for over 50 years. We're just continuing that. We're just making it available to the public under a number of conditional zoning provisions and from the neighborhood standpoint, private restrictions, private use restrictions that have a great deal of say in terms of future use on their property that we need to get their permission to change. Again the reality is this property is going to be a private club or semi-private club in terms of the restaurant, the rear portion where the pool, the basketball courts, the volleyball, the workout facility that will still be private. It's only the clubhouse portion that you see on Lansdowne Drive that will be open to the the public. We believe this gives us the opportunities to succeed and to be a vital continuing member of the association. I think we've added value to the properties in Lansdowne neighborhood. I see that because I have seen realtor listings where realtors have advertised the fact that you're within walking distance to the Signature Club. We talk about walking, connectivity, Pedestrian orientation, this is a perfect example. Are we perfect? No. We have some overflow parking issues. But by and large, I think the history of the club is we've done a very good job in terms of being a good neighbor, and I'll let the neighborhood speak to those issues. Sam Carneal is their attorney, and Sam is going to introduce the president, I thank another couple of the neighborhood residents and officers of the board to address the process that we've undertaken to come together so that we now have their endorsement of our application. I'll let Sam say a few words. Thanks. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Members, I'm Sam Carniello. I represent the Lansdowne Neighborhood Association. we want to state our support for this application. However, I also want to make it very clear that the Lansdowne Neighborhood Association does not support just any B1 zoning in their neighborhood. We support this particular change with the private restrictive covenants that we have worked out with the Turners and Mr. Simpson based on the historical use of this property. We see it as an asset to the community, to the neighborhood. is something that makes Lansdowne the special place that it is. Bruce mentioned the private covenants. We have worked out and signed in advance of this meeting a set of private covenants that address our particular concerns. Parking has always been an issue, and we've implemented, hopefully, a procedure that will allow for when it can be reasonably anticipated, there's going to be a need for either shuttle buses or valet parking. We have tightened the uses. Mr. Emmons may not want to put one or two uses on the property, and we understand the conditional zoning, and we like that. We've dialed that down even narrower privately with the uses that they can do in the B1 zoning. They've agreed to that. I can understand not wanting to get the property zoned down to one use, but privately they've agreed we've got something worked out where if they want to change from the restaurant use they're talking now, they've got to work with the Neighborhood Association. Again, it addresses the concern that we have of an encroachment of business uses in a historically residential property. It's a good solution of working with the Turners and the Neighborhood Association. We have also continued protections that the Neighborhood Association sees are necessary for that wooded area that was mentioned by Mr. Salee. We want to make sure that that's never developed, and we have put protections in place for that. we've also put protections in for the neighborhood on the use of the property should there ever be any future changes. We've had a good dialogue with the Turners in this, and we've reached what we feel to be a good agreement as far as the neighborhood in addressing the current concerns as much as they can be addressed at this time. You can't anticipate every problem, but looking at the historical use of the property and the fact that we'd like to see it stay as an asset to our neighborhood, but we think we've worked out a good agreement. In the process of letting you know, the neighborhood association, Lansdowne Neighborhood Association, is voluntary. It is not a deed-restricted community anymore in the sense that the houses were developed prior, in the sense of there being a continuing mandatory association. It's a voluntary association. There are approximately 900 households in Lansdowne. hands down, approximately 300 of those are members of the association. In the process of looking at this zone change and informing the neighborhood, the neighborhood association had their street captains and lieutenants hand-delivered notice of a meeting open to the neighborhood that was held where the Turners made their presentation, it was open to the entire neighborhood. And both members of the association and non-members attended. in addressing how should the Board vote, the Board sent out a survey and had it delivered to all 900 residences with a survey saying, do you support this or not, and providing a draft of the proposed covenants. We'll go through the results of that in a minute, but the support was overwhelming for it. He sent out 900. We received back around 190. Of that, I believe 160 were in favor of this change. So we've done our best to get the pulse of the neighborhood and see what what do they feel about this business use? And again, this particular business use, not just any of them. And with that, I'd like to ask Judy Worth, who's the president, to speak, if that's okay. Ladies and gentlemen of the Planning Commission, I think I've spoken with most of you before when you were in your committee meetings. and some more of us were going to speak today, but they've had to go back to their day jobs. So I'm singing solo up here, and I'll try and be brief about it. You have heard, let me say also that I live at 775 Sherwood Drive and have been a resident there for, it will be 20 years this year. So I've been in the neighborhood for quite some time. We were approached last year when Bruce Cotton was our Neighborhood Association President by Troy Turner about the possibility of this zone change. and requested to support the zone change. And we raised really four big issues with Mr. Turner and Mr. Simpson at the time. One you haven't really heard about, which is what kind of restaurant are we talking about and who would run it? What about signage? We all eat McDonald's, but we really didn't want golden arches sitting in the middle of our neighborhood. Also, what kind of precedent would we be setting if we put a B1 zoning there in the neighborhood? And the final issue had to do with parking and impact on people who live around the club, and the larger neighborhood as well with traffic. Through a period of negotiation over the last two months, really pretty intensely the last three weeks, we have reached agreement on a set of covenants. And before we signed those covenants, as you just heard Sam Carneal, our attorney, mention, we shared that information with the people who live in our neighborhood. And as Sam said, we are not a homeowners association. We are a neighborhood association, which means that membership is voluntary. And we have roughly about a third of the households who live in the Lansdowne area are members of our neighborhood association. But when we take a position on things that affect everybody, like traffic controls or planning and zoning, and zoning, and we've taken positions several times over the last few years, we try to get input from everybody who lives in the neighborhood so that we can speak with the larger voice and not just the voice of people who are members. And so we had an all-neighborhood meeting March the, I think it was the 16th, Monday. Everybody in the neighborhood was invited to attend. The Turners agreed to come with Bruce Simpson and explain what they were proposing to do and why they were proposing to do it. Mr. Carnea was there to answer questions on our behalf for the neighborhood, and I think we had a very good exchange. There were about 95 people there that night. Subsequently, and I'm getting ready to turn into a bag lady here, we created a cover letter and also printed copies of the draft deed of restrictive covenants as it was worded at that particular time and a survey response form and distributed it to all 900 households in the Lansdowne area. And I'm going to... Just so that if you're curious, you can see what kind of information the people who live in our area received prior to voting or completing the survey. I would also add that we're trying to get into the 21st century, So we actually put this on our website with links to the planning staff so that people could see the actual development plan and some other information. So as you've heard, we got the results back from the survey. We had a total of 192 responses, and my friends over at UK Survey Research say that that's a very high percentage return, much, much higher than you typically get. The last count, we had 161 that voted in support of the zone change, 25 opposed, and then we had six people who sent their two cents in and didn't take a position. They had other issues they wanted to communicate to us that they'd like us to take care of. So last night, our board of directors met and we reviewed this information. We reviewed the pros and cons with Mr. Carneal and we voted. And our vote was in support of the zone change condition with the signed covenants going into effect. And the covenants address our issues. They address what kind of restaurant, limitations on the type of restaurant. The development plan addresses the signing issues. in terms of precedent, the planning staff in recommending that the properties on Raven Road not be approved for zone change addressed some of our concerns. We don't want to see business development down Raven Road. There's already been an attempt to do that. We think that would be an incursion into our neighborhood. That would be a totally inappropriate incursion. The other issue there had to do with future uses of B-1 zoning, and our covenant puts serious restrictions on anything else that might be included there. The final issue has to do with parking. And our agreements are not going to solve every problem. Basically, they involve an agreement with the Turners that they will do a better job of scheduling events there, that there will be someone there whose job will be to coordinate scheduling so that they won't have banquet and swim meets and something big going on at the restaurant all at the same time. Also, that they will make sure there's valet parking offered when those kinds of events occur and that there will be someone designated as a person for us to take complaints to if we still continue to see problems there. I guess I would add two points. One is we do think that the club is an enormous asset to the community. There's been a lot of investment there. We would really not like to see it deteriorate to the kind of condition it was in when it was the signature club at the time that the Turners purchased it. The other thing I would say is that as with any semi-public or public use, when they're successful, there is often some sort of impact on the surrounding neighborhood. And we recognize that in particular, people who live on Raven Road, but not just Raven Road, people who live on a part of Zandale and also on Breckenwood, have had some overflow parking in front of their houses on various occasions. We don't think our covenant can address that issue. We think that's an issue that the neighborhood, the neighborhood association, and the city are going to have to take up. And we hope that as we can get consensus from the neighbors in terms of what would be appropriate, whether it's single side parking, resident only parking, that we continue to work on that issue. And with that, unless somebody else from the board who's still here would like to thank you very much. Thank you. We're obviously pleased with the neighborhood's endorsement and my feeble math skills bear me out. It's about an 84% favorable approval of those that voted. And I will say this, in my own experience in representing neighborhoods over the years, I don't know that I've ever heard of one hand-delivered 900 invitations to express your opinion and have that level of turnout that they've had. That's a fairly significant, but then again, the Lansdowne Neighborhood Association is a very significant neighborhood in our community. The issue about parking, I think you'll hear from some folks who live on Raven. we believe that we can have done all that we can do and pledge to do whatever is available in the future with respect to these instances where there's excess several times a year excess parking issues that the neighborhood association my understanding is not the neighborhood association but Raven Road residents at one time voted upon the question of whether or not to have limited parking on that street because they can through proper procedures through the city, have permit parking. And my understanding was that there was a tie vote on that question of whether or not to permit permit parking. You will probably hear from some of those folks and they can address it. But we believe that in balancing all of the interest and the impact that this club has had in a positive way, particularly since it was rejuvenated in 2005, And very rarely will you hear a neighborhood come down after this size and this level of commitment, give this kind of endorsement to a change in use. But it's a change in use that is consistent with its history. It's a change in use that is protected by conditional zoning. And it's a change in use, in terms of the law anyway, by restrictive covenants. In terms of the reality, there has been no change in use. We're simply asking that you give us the green light to go forward so we can have the opportunity to continue to be successful. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Any questions for Bruce from Commission? Okay. I do have to ask the question. I know you've had the Neighborhood Association speak in favor of this. Are there any other citizens wishing to speak in favor of this application? Any other citizens wishing to speak in favor? Okay. Seeing none, those wishing to speak in opposition. If you would come forward. Give us your name and address, please. Mr. Chairman, the staff has received one communication on this zone change. It is a letter of opposition from Gail and Jack Musgrave, 3314 Brook Hill Circle. I'd like to circulate that to the commission at this time. Thank you, Mr. Sanli. Are there any others wishing to speak in opposition? Yes sir, you come forward. If you can give us your name and address please. Members of the Planning Commission, thank you very much. My name is Will Birchfield and I live on Raven Road, 808. We live, our property adjoins the signature club and our house is approximately right across from the swimming pool. And the parking, street parking is the overriding reason that I think this request should be denied. And the Signature Club is ill-prepared to handle such a large number of cars. As it is, they only have 179 parking spots on their property. That's all they have. At the Neighborhood Association meeting about a week and a half ago, the club reckoned that the ballroom could hold approximately 350 people. The pool area, whenever that's an operation, would handle approximately 400. A supper club, they reckon, would maybe handle 250 people. If you throw in the patio about 50, 30 to 50 people maybe in the tiki bar, that all adds up to about 1,100 people that would be there on any given day, especially in the summertime. We don't have that much of a problem during the winter, but in the summer months, the warmer months, that is always a problem. Now, if you would assume that two people would arrive in a single car, you cut that down to about 550. You subtract that, the total amount of parking spots they have from 550, you wind up with 371. Bantham places to park. Now, they started the club with a shuttle bus in 05, and then discontinued it, I think about a year later. They were shuttling cars or people, some of their staff, I think it was, if I remember right, to the church or to the Glendover School. Glendover School is about a mile away. They had some arrangement with the central bank, which is about a quarter of a mile away, but there isn't any facility close by that they could do valet parking to. So anyway, our problem is that Raven Road is a narrow, winding street. It goes between Lansdowne Drive and Tates Creek Road. And it's all a familiar scene whenever you have people that's jammed in side by side down this curvy street, and if you get two big vehicles, say a truck or an SUV parked on either side, I guarantee you will not get a fire truck down that street. There's no way you can do it. It's happened many times. We've had problems getting in and out of our driveway, and so nothing has ever really resolved that. I mean, Mr. Turner did put up some signs on the street, but it's still a continual problem with people that come to that club, that park, you know, down our street, can't get in and out. There's been various accidents that's happened because of the overcrowding trying to get into this club. So I don't know where you're going to put these cars at. I mean, there's not enough here of parking spots for them to do anything that would relieve our area because we keep getting crowded in all the time. And I don't really have a problem with them having the restaurant public, I mean, per se, but it's just the fact that when you do that, then you're going to have more cars than we already have, which is a huge problem. This is mainly in the summertime between, well, say this time of year and maybe the end of September. Not much goes on in the wintertime, and that's good. But we brought this up to the Turners time and again. I mean, we live right around the corner. and as far as the business aspect of the club I mean if you look at, go around the corner and look at Sal's and Malone's, they have plenty of parking there. I mean you know you can walk to your car if you want valet they'll park it down a few feet for you and come and get it so I don't know So to me, it just looks like, you know, that there is a never-ending thing going on here that we have no relief from. It just because it's a very prime area. A lot of people love to come there and eat, you know, and that's why the Turner's built this facility. It's a nice facility, but as far as the parking goes, it don't help us one bit. So that's about all I have to say. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Mr. Brooksville. Is there anyone else that would like to speak in opposition? My name is Jean Keating. I live at 820 Raven Road. I've lived there 17 years. 820 is about in the center of the street. It's a duplex. The Lansdowne Club and then later the Signature Club has been a part of my life for all of those years. I walk by my windows, living room, dining room, kitchen. I see the whole scene. I not only see it, I hear it. Sometimes when I'm getting into bed at night, boom, boom from the music. So it's not just parking. I think parking is a big issue, but it's not just about parking. It's any kind of change that's going to make that presence of a club, a commercial situation, have to integrate it with our everyday living. We have a long process of communication with the owners, with the neighborhood association. It just wears me out, quite frankly. I just don't know where to go with all this. And so when it came up that, you know, they wanted to make the top floor, I thought, well, what are they going to do, code their patrons so they have red for public and blue for private? I mean, it's just we haven't solved the original problems at the club's inception so that we're distorting what's going on now. I mean, I'm sure the neighbors don't care whether they're public or private people sitting down at tables. It's quantity, it's presence. I have lights from the tennis court that come in my living room, my dining room. You know, how much compromise are you going to make? As far as the parking goes, I have to correct Mr. Simpson on the 6. No, it's a lot more than 6. I'm sorry. And I'd even be willing to, well, let me back up. Let me say when the kids come in their swim meets, I'm okay with that. This is for children. It's a nice summer sound. You know that they're going to roll in and they're going to roll out. It's predictable. But we never know when we're going to get these cars coming down Raven Road. And it's a safety hazard. That intersection lands down in Raven is dangerous. It becomes a one-way street and it depends on who got there first, which way it's going to be. They put yellow striping at the curb. I think personally it's on the wrong side of the street, but nobody asked me. I just, you know, it's overwhelming to us. Now the other thing I want to correct is about our survey. When this all happened in May of 2006, we had 500 realtors over at that place. We were not prepared for it. There was no communication. You know how they say if your neighbor's going to have a party, you should let them know? Well, we don't get that option. We never know. So we had all these people. Anyway, to make a long story short, with the help of Linda Gorton and Judy Wirth, we discovered that our process would be to go to traffic management and control, and they would tell us what the options were, which was residential, one street, or limited number of hours. So we made up a survey, and there's 14 households in Raven. Two of them are driveways. We had to count them. And then we had half renters and half owners. We were required, according to those numbers, this Chuck Saylor, I believe was his name, We had to get 10 signatures. We got the 10 signatures. So to say it was split, that's not true. We had one resident who said absolutely not. She did not want to handle it that way. She wanted to deal with Mr. Turner one-on-one, which evidently she did. The Neighborhood Association extended an invitation to come and help work out this process. It was not a good meeting. we had never met before on anything. And it was unpleasant, quite frankly. It was really bad, and Judy Wirth would be a witness to that. So what I did after that was to call Traffic Management and Control, and I called Linda Gorton's office to say, okay, where do we go from here? We got our signatures. You know, the neighborhood association's not involved in it anymore. and I was told, what survey? Chuck is transferred. There's nothing on the calendar. His replacement comes the end of September, which was the original date that Chuck had told us. They were supposed to do a study of the street and present that to the council. That loop never got closed. So how would you feel if you were me? You'd say, forget it. And I have not involved myself in any of these situations until we got the letter from the association. Things started rolling again. So somewhere, either we've got to do a better job or we have to put people on probation when they want something. My first question was, how will the ordinances impact this zone change? When I call up at night and say there's music out there in the tiki bar in the pool, is somebody going to say, well, we're a business now. We don't have to abide by noise and light ordinances. I don't know. I hope that isn't the case. I hope the ordinances still apply. Can anybody tell me? I don't know. I called the planning and they said, well, as far as the covenant goes, it's wonderful on paper. I hope to God it works. I don't know. They tell me that the urban county government has nothing to do with that covenant. That's between the lawyers. So that's where we are. Just wanted you to hear the other side. So, remember, there's only 14 households on that street, half of them are rental properties. And they're not real accustomed to doing political things. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Keeling. Is there anyone else who would like to speak? In opposition. Okay, seeing none, we will close this portion of the hearing. I'm sorry, excuse me. Thank you Mr. Simpson. I was thinking about time limits, but we do have rebuttal. Thank you. You were serious about the Bruce Simpson rule being invoked, I think. I appreciate the concerns of Mr. Birchfield and Ms. Keating indicated to you that here's Here's some concerns expressed by the folks on Raven Road. They've been there before the Turners bought the property in terms of these overflow issues, which to the best of our information occurs six times a year, and we can do what we can and have done those. The first year the club was open, we had shuttle service and valet service operating pretty routinely because people came to the club and it was going well. I wish we could have 1,100 people a day at the club. We wouldn't be here today in terms of seeking to make this public. But we haven't had that. We've had a drop-off in attendance, and private clubs have a hard time. Lafayette Club across the street, top of my office building, failed because it couldn't be open to the public. The Raven Road can always go back and re-vote on the issue of parking on one side of the street. That's always available as an option, and we support that. We would do everything we could to support parking on one side of Raven Road as an option to eliminate that conflict when it takes place, and hopefully with a more resolve toward coordination of these things, that won't happen. Of course, we can't force someone to take valet parking or use the shuttle service. We use Glendover School for that. We use Central Bank for that. We have plenty of spaces there for any overflow situations. But we can't force people to use it, but we will encourage them as much as we can. We've got ongoing, as part of our agreement with the neighborhood, meetings with the neighborhood to talk about issues that come up relative to these agreements. In short, I believe we've done everything that we can do within our power and control to comply with the ordinance, to work with the neighborhood association. We had 900 members, 900 families in this neighborhood, and we've got the endorsement of 84%. I think that's significant. I commend that to your attention, and we ask for a favorable vote. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Staff, you have rebuttal comment? Yes, sir. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I just have one point conferring with Ms. Boland. The noise ordinance will apply to the Signature Club whether or not the property is rezoned as requested. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Saleem. Okay. I guess at this time we'll close this portion of the public hearing and I'll turn it over to Commission for any further comment, discussion. I think you have before you the recommendations of staff as well as the Zoning Committee. And are there any comments? Ms. Copeland. Yes. Do we have any kind of ordinance for light pollution or light drift? There's nothing in the zoning ordinance other than a general prohibition of lighting on commercial properties being aimed at residential properties. There's a prohibition of that throughout the entire zoning ordinance. Other than that, there is no standards or lumens or anything like that in the zoning ordinance. Okay. And do we – I personally have been through the parking permit process, and it is very tricky because they come out unannounced and do a survey. And if you have an empty street when they're surveying, then you have no problem. So can we as a body do anything to facilitate a permit process because they're almost guaranteed to fail if they use the same process they used in our neighborhood two years ago? I'm not aware of any leverage that the Planning Commission would have on that. I don't know if Ms. Bowen is more familiar with that program than I. I do remember some type of survey of property owners being involved, but I'm not familiar with that process. Well, they come out and survey the cars that are parked on the street at an unannounced time, and then they check the license plates to see where those cars are registered to see if they're visiting or their owner cars. and then after they have figured out that you do have a problem, then you are able to buy a plate that gives you get a sticker for your car so you can park, and that costs you so much every year. But you never know when they're coming. So if they're having night events, they will never qualify for a permit process. So I was just wondering if we have no way to help them. Not that I'm aware of, no, ma'am. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Copeland. Any other comments? Ms. Owens? Question. Maybe Bill might be able to answer. Do we know the seating capacity of the restaurant bar? I don't see Mr. Martin but I'm going to look at the development plan to see if it mentions it. Yes, the restaurant parking is based on square footage and I believe it's your subdivision Committee the plan preparer mentioned that the higher of the two ratios was square footage versus seating. I don't know if the applicant could answer that particular question. All right. Yes sir. It's 147. Okay. Thank you. Thank you Ms. Owens. Any other comments? Is there a motion? Go ahead. If there's no other comments, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make one comment and then a motion. Being as raving as such a short street, I would encourage you to work with your council member to try to work on parking on one side, which may or may not be a relief, but I think your council member could get that done quicker than we certainly can get it done, but that's what I would suggest that you do. The other thing is if there's no other comments, I'd like to move the MAR 2009-4 for approval based on recommendations of staff as presented in our report. Okay, we have a motion for approval of the portion of 3256 and 3300 for the reasons provided by staff and conditional zoning. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. All opposed, please say no. Motion carries. Yes sir. move approval of ZDP 2009-15 with the 15 conditions. You add 16? Yeah we could add 16. Conditional zoning. Conditional zoning number 16. Thank you Mr. Chairman. We have a motion and a second to approve ZDP with the 16 conditions. All those in favor please signify by saying aye. All opposed please say no. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you very much. Can I just say something? I wanted to thank the Neighborhood Association and the applicant for working together as closely as they did. You all look like you should be a model for coordination on zoning issues in the future. You can come forward. Yes, please. We have to get this. Sorry about that. In the private covenant, we address lighting and sound, and the owners of the property are to soundproof the property as much as feasible so that the B1 zoned property can't be heard from adjoining residential properties, and all lighting is to be directed downward. We did address that in the private covenants. Thank you. Just for a point of information. Okay, I guess the next one is a text amendment. staff a moment to get set up. Good afternoon, Chairman Vaughn, members of the Commission. I hope we didn't lose anybody, but I think we might have. The next item on our agenda is a text amendment and can be found on page 4. And it's item number 1 and found in your notebooks behind tab 3 today. In your notebook, you'll find first the staff's report, initiation minutes, and then third the proposed text. This is ZODA 2009-3, which is a proposal to amend Article 17 to alter signage in the downtown zones, as well as a few other changes to the Article 17 signage ordinance and some associated changes to a few other articles in the zoning ordinance. I just want to make sure you all can hear. The signed ordinance, Article 17 for downtown businesses, was last amended approximately 10 years ago, and at that time the ordinance was amended to reflect some recommendations. Excuse me, Tracy. Yes. Can we take the conversation outside there, Mr. Simpson? Thank you, sir. That's okay. Appreciate it. Thank you. Sorry about that. That's okay. You can continue. Article 17 was amended approximately 10 years ago, and at that time, any recommendations and changes were reflective of a mayoral appointed task force that recommended some things to revitalize downtown, including some signage changes. Over the past few months, the staff has been working with several entities, the Downtown Development Authority, Downtown Lexington Corporation, the administration, as well as some downtown developers to outline some general changes to the sign ordinance for downtown. And I don't see any of those people here, so I'm going to assume that they are in support of the changes that we outlined. I'm going to go ahead and move forward with some of the purpose and need that we outlined with them was to just encourage activity downtown, especially in terms of retail and entertainment, increase visibility for signage both vehicular and pedestrian and I know Ms. Whitman has mentioned this to me previously about it's hard to drive downtown and see the businesses that are lining the streets because the signs are pressed against the buildings next would be to help create a more interesting and vibrant downtown and also allow businesses both not only in downtown but in some of the B1 areas in the infill and redevelopment area and mixed-use projects to have the ability to have their businesses more easily recognized by patrons. And then some of the other things were to just relax some of the restrictions, especially associated in the downtown where we've seen new developments, encourage more creativity and artistic expression through signage, And then kind of a secondary purpose would be to move all of our signage regulations into Article 17. They've been, over the last 10 years, placed in a couple different places, and this will allow us to bring them all back into Article 17, which makes it easier for building inspection to administer the ordinance. One of the first changes that came up when we started looking at signage changes for downtown was to allow projecting signs again. Projecting signs have been gone from downtown now for roughly 40 years or four decades, and those were removed mostly as a result of urban renewal projects. There had been a real cluttering of downtown signage, and so those were systematically removed. And it created a cleaner downtown, but in some respects it also took away visibility of businesses and some of the vibrance downtown. So the new proposal would be to allow projecting signs that are up to 50 square feet in size, and they would be mounted to the building between 10 and 30 feet on the building, not to block or interfere with windows, other signs, wall signs, doors, or other architectural features. And then, of course, flashing or blinking signs would still be prohibited. Some of the other changes proposed for the downtown zones are to add menu boxes. I believe we talked about that in terms of the World Equestrian Games and things that will help visitors as you come downtown. Maybe there's not enough room in your window, but you want to display your menu. A menu box is the perfect way to do that. And our ordinance currently might allow that in kind of a roundabout way, but this will allow that specific use with four square feet for a menu to be displayed. Also adding above canopy signs and there's an example here on the on the slide of Regal Cinema where a sign was placed that does extend above the canopy of the building and there's been some Board of Adjustment cases over the last five years where that's been requested it's becoming a more popular type of sign and the staff felt that it was appropriate downtown and in other places in the community. One other change for downtown was to increase the size of canopy signs so that you can do up to 20% of a canopy face rather than it's set at 15 in the B1 and they're connected there. And then lastly was to remove any restriction that's been in place again for about 40 years on painted wall signs and this the wall sign would be allowed to be painted on the building and our understanding is typically they don't get painted on the building anymore but get painted on some other surface and then attached but it would need to be resurfaced or repainted on a regular basis but those would be allowed again other changes outside of the downtown zone were to add some changes or make some changes in the B1 again for projecting signs and here's an example where an old projecting sign has remained up for farmers jewelry on Euclid, is that right? Again, same size, 50 square feet, and that would be allowed in lieu of a freestanding sign for these locations. And then we added some criteria so that not every B1, you know, maybe a strip shopping center, it's not really appropriate for them to have projecting signs. A freestanding sign works better. But where buildings are closer to the street, within 10 feet of the property line, and then located in the infill and redevelopment area, We thought that those were good locational criteria for where projecting signs would work better. And here's a couple of examples on South Limestone as you're coming from past the university there towards downtown where a projecting or where a freestanding sign is used, but there's not a lot of room and it's a little cluttered and maybe a projecting sign might be more effective in there. Also in the B1, again, we're adding menu boxes for restaurants in the B1 zone and above canopy signs. And these are two examples of other above canopy signs. For the above canopies, that would be taken out of whatever you'd be allowed in a wall sign. So you wouldn't be allowed a large wall sign and then another above canopy. You'd have to diminish one to put the other one up. Other proposed changes associated with this. I'm sure most of you remember we had a mixed-use signage change just a few months ago where banners became a very large concern. And one of the, I think, associated text amendments with that was to allow banners in some of the zones that would maybe be next to a mixed-use. So where a pole banner could be displayed in a parking lot in an R3 or R4 zone as a conditional use when it's accessory to a mixed-use project. And then in the B3, B4, I1, I2 zones where we would allow pole banners when displayed in parking lots accessory to a mixed-use project again. And those would be subject to the exact same restrictions that we saw just a few months ago in terms of spacing and height and number. So I won't go into that again. In addition, other proposed changes for the ordinance would be to define a way to calculate the area of a three-dimensional sign. And we looked at this last week at work session, but the bowling alley on Southland has a 3D sign. And this calculation will allow that to be easily calculated and hopefully used for freestanding and or projecting signs. And I think that would add some more interest to some of our signage, especially in the downtown. Other new changes for the sign ordinance include adding some new definitions for a landmark sign, a district identification sign. We talked about this already, a menu box, an above canopy sign, adding those definitions so it's clear. And then lastly, a monument sign. A monument sign is shown here, Calvary Baptist Church, just a sign that's broader than it is tall usually. It's like at least 75% larger than, or anyway, low-lying to the ground. Monument signs, we see those fairly typically in like P1 zones because they have a height limit of 10 feet. Or for residential developments, you'll see a monument type sign. And it's already used for one of our expansion area zones that requires a monument type sign, but we never defined it. So this will help clarify that. One of the other changes that came up in our discussions with the downtown groups was that art, sometimes the definition of art or works of fine art limits signage. And that's something that we thought that art should be allowed and not be counted against you in terms of your signage. So we worked to redefine how art is defined in the terms of the sign ordinance. One of the last changes I wanted to talk about, but I think is fairly important, is adding some flexibility to request what we are now defining as a landmark or a district identification sign. And these would be allowed in all zones, not just the downtown zone, but would allow something above and beyond what our ordinance allows. And it would be reviewed by a sign committee. The committee would be appointed by the mayor with five members, including the Commissioner of Public Works and Development, an architect, and a building inspector. And the proposed ordinance does go into not only the definition of those two types of signs, but also some criteria for approving those, including that the sign exhibit distinctive stylistic features and an unusual material in the design. The sign is an example of artistic design and skilled craftsmanship, and the sign is a significant part of the architectural or cultural history of the community. And I'm not sure that they would need to meet all three to each extent, but I think it would be up to the applicant to say how they're meeting those in terms of that. This, I think, allows some flexibility for something like a public market center sign that you would see in Seattle or something like the Parkette sign. Of course, the Parkette sign didn't become iconic until much later after it was put up. Now that you can't put something like that up, it's more important for our cultural history here in Lexington. But the ability to propose something that would create a district, say for the Barry McNeese's district, the bourbon or distillery district down there would be wonderful, I think, for them. And then two of the last changes that are proposed. One I just brought up last week but want to make sure that we have a reference to Article 28 and Article 8, 21, which is the B4 zone for adaptive reuse projects. It refers you for signage to Article 28, which is mixed use. But we want to make sure that that points us back to Article 17, so we'll need to change that. And then lastly, there has been some concern about the courthouse area design review board and their duties to review signs. And that, I think, at least in one instance, created some conflict and some confusion for the board and building inspection. And it was agreed the board was willing to give up that review unanimously. And their staff member also agreed that things would be easier if they didn't have to review signs. And so the underlying zoning for that district, those sign restrictions would just, that would be all. You would just go to the building inspection counter to get signs. It would not need to go to the design review board for those. So that's a small change to Article 27 as well. I want to point you to one last thing before I end today. On page 3 of your packet, I'm going to put this. I noticed this morning as I was preparing, there is one small error, and I want to get that in the record so we can adopt the right text. On page 3, towards the bottom, under Downtown Business Zones, number 4 says canopy or awning signs shall be permitted. and your copy does not have the number four underlined or the first part of the sentence, and then it has a cross-through within the text of that. And I went to look back at my copy and our copy online of that section of Article 17, and it didn't match. So I realized at that point that canopy signs and awning signs were regulated just above there, where it says nameplates, direction signs, menu boards, menu boxes, and we scratched out and signs on or under canopy or awning. And then we wanted to add a whole new section. So there was some confusion and it was on my part in drafting that and I wanted to just clarify that before we adopt anything. But it would add that language about having 20% for the face of the canopy and there's not anything that needs to be deleted. It's just section four is all new. Does that make sense? So your copy in your notebook isn't quite right. The copy on the overhead here is. And I've just given Stephanie the correct packet as well. And then before we spoke at work session about contacting some sign companies regarding these amendments, and I did contact three different individuals and sent them the text, And I received one email that wasn't really even a response to me from a gentleman who his main type of sign is inflatable signs or balloons that you would attach for like a grand opening or something of that sort. And he obviously wants those types of signs to be allowed. And under the ordinance as it is today, it doesn't specifically say no inflatable signs, but it does have some restriction that building inspection interprets as not allowing those. So they, this gentleman, actually responded to Ms. James of the council, Council Member James, about a concern about that but was not wanting to be on the record at this point in front of the Planning Commission to object to not being able to place those. The other two people I spoke with did not provide any written comments, but one gentleman mentioned electronic message displays and that Louisville and I guess quite a few other communities in Kentucky do allow those, especially for what comes to mind most for me is like on a restaurant sign. You might have your McDonald's logo, golden arches, and then underneath, instead of putting some sort of bulletin where you change the letters, they use an electronic sign to say Filet-O-Fish is on sale today for $1.29 or something along those lines. So his argument was that Fayette County is not very business friendly because they don't allow those types of signs because those signs, in his opinion, generate a lot more revenue for businesses. So I thought I'd share that with you. But in conclusion for what we've proposed right now, I think those two changes really don't necessarily relate to some of the downtown business changes, sign changes we're making. So if those types of signs are of interest to the commission and you would like us to pursue looking into adding those to the ordinance, I think we can do that as a separate text amendment rather than trying to work that in with what we're doing right now for downtown. And I believe or we believe that these are warranted changes and will in time help to revitalize downtown and just make it a more pedestrian-friendly and better place for Lexington. And we've listed three reasons on the staff report for approval. And in terms of those, we think that these are in line with the comprehensive plans, themes in terms of promoting and strengthening the viability of downtown and implementing infill and redevelopment strategies. also the changes have been reviewed and encouraged by those groups we've met with the administration the downtown development authority and Lexington Corporation and then the changes are timely for our infill and redevelopment strategies and implementing those but also I think towards other new development downtown happy to answer any questions I know I didn't get to the specifics of the ordinance but we've reviewed those a a couple times. So if we do have specific questions, I'll dig right in. Thank you, Tracy. Ms. Copeland? I have one question and I'd like to make the motion if there's no discussion. Because we're running out of light. He'll turn it up for you. Ms. Richardson, decades ago, her menu signs on like bollards. Is that possible with your sign ordinance? When we talked about World Equestrian Games, you said that... That's the same thing as the menu signs, only you put them out on a bollard on top of a pole, a hitching post or whatever. Is that possible under this? I'm just asking. That's okay. As a temporary sign, I think it could be placed out there. Or you could put it in a format of an A-frame. and do this and kind of meet the same objective too. Tracy, I did have one other question. Going back to one of the previous cases, you have an H1 overlay zone business enterprise. They propose signage of some sort of canopy of whatnot. BOAR has a final say on that signage or does this committee that you propose has final say? You know, I'm not sure that the BOAR reviews signage now, do they? Not the content, but just the size, style. Yeah, I would think we'd need them to go to both. That's our consensus is they need approval from both. I would think the BOAR would be more restrictive. This sign committee is probably trying to allow more, and then I would want to go to that committee first and get approval, and then say, okay, BOAR, now how do you want me to tone it down? So I guess what I'm saying, if the BOAR makes one decision, the signed committee can't overrule the BOAR. Okay. No, I wouldn't think so. Okay, all right. And we can work on laying out the logistics of the other thing that Bill and I had talked about was a timing issue. When you come in for a permit and you need to go to that signed review committee, you know, it's imperative for building inspection to notify their commissioner and our commissioner that they have a permit waiting for review and they would need to convene the committee. Okay, thank you. Ms. Copeland? Mr. Chairman, I move that we accept or adopt ZODA 2009-3 Article 17 for reasons provided by the staff, including making number five start at under canopy. Is that okay? Number five, 17-7 on page three, you're correction. It's number four. Number four? It's a replacement. Okay, well, however it's supposed to be, I want it that way. Okay, we have a motion and second to adopt Zota 209-3. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, please say no. Motion carries. I want to say thank you to Tracy and staff and others. Tremendous amount of effort. months to get where we are. So thank you. So Tracy, the sign board is going to be appointed or how is that done? I guess they would ask one of the building inspectors to sit in as a member. And that would probably be Greg Walker since he's our building inspector dedicated to signage for the most part. And then an architect, they could ask Randall to come on over. the Commissioner of Public Works and then two other people so they could call you too. No, I'm not trying to recruit for the sign board. I just want to know how. Although I know a farmer out named Sheikh Mahan would probably be good at that. You're going to volunteer him again? Let's give Tracy a big hand. I think she's got a big hand. We have one more thing. Yes, I think we have a commission item. Barb, I guess, is up next. Neal Day, if you're watching, you are sorely missed today for the sweet treats. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Or evening, almost. Evening. This is also on page four of your agenda, and it's item A under commission items. It is a public facility review requested by the Fayette County Public School System for the Cassidy Elementary School renovation. Nobody is able to be here this afternoon to represent the schools, so hopefully you won't have a whole lot of questions, but I can answer some. But they wanted to go ahead with it today because they can't issue a permit for construction until you all review this. Anyway, we have the property is right here. we've got Providence Lane and Cassidy, Art Road, and Tates Creek Road. And this is at 1125 Tates Creek Road. The property is owned R1C, and it kind of forms, it helps to form the boundary or the western edge of the Chevy Chase neighborhood. The part that we're reviewing is just for Cassidy, and it's this, basically this right there. That consists of about 3.7 acres, and the whole site is 11.23 acres. The existing building is a little under 55,000 square feet, and they're adding a little bit more than 19,000 square feet, so it'll be a total of just under 74,000 square feet when the building's done. Access is currently from Tates Creek and Cassidy Avenue, and then they're going to add access from Hart. Chris, if you could put the next one up. Thank you. You can do it that way. Yeah, please. we've got current access actually goes into Morton the Morton area off of Tates Creek Road and then Cassidy provides access to the Cassidy part of the school and then there will be another access from Hart going into let's see going up into here and down into here they'll be able to exit from here they're adding this parking area this parking area and then And because they've taken away some of Morton's area, some of their parking, they're adding 16 spaces for Morton right there. The comp plan recommends public education for the property, and that probably is in recognition of the current and the historic use of the property for both an elementary and a middle school. And then it indicates a desire for it to remain that. public education is a category that includes all public school facilities, including the central offices, and then accessory facilities for public elementary, middle, and high schools. Cassidy and Morton have been on this property for many years, probably at least, well, I know at least since the early 20th century and possibly even longer than that. And they have discussed for many, many months the expansion and the renovation of Cassidy. And that was also included in the comprehensive plan text. It said that Cassidy was intending to totally renovate, or the school system was intending to totally renovate Cassidy's school, as well as a few other schools, one other elementary and two of the middle schools, and that was part of their future plans. They've got the construction fencing up, but they can't get a permit to do any kind of construction until we have this public facility review. they propose to totally renovate the school but they also want to keep the existing architecture they're adding classroom space and administrative office space as part of this it'll be a two-story edition and if you can put the last thing up chris please this is the two-story edition in the front they're also proposing to add a stage area which is joining the gym and that'll be one story and then they're going to enclose this it's the mechanical area and the kitchen area, and currently it's not enclosed apparently, and they're planning on enclosing that, so that's part of the renovation. And in addition to the new parking, other outdoor improvements are seating in the front and the rear of the school, and then a new preschool playground and underground detention in the front of the building. The school system has assessed the building condition of Cassidy as port-a-fair, and one of their goals of their planning committee is to provide safe, comfortable, and aesthetically pleasing state-of-the-art facilities for their students. So based on this goal and based on the assessment of the building condition, it appears that the total renovation is warranted. And I found nothing in the comprehensive plan that is in opposition to this. There's no neighborhood opposition. There are four goals and 16 objectives listed on pages two and three of your staff report, and then text and the land use element all in support of this. So we are recommending approval for the reason that the land use element of the plan recommends that the property be used for public education purposes, recognizing its historic use as a public elementary and a public middle school, and indicating a desire for it to remain as such. The text of the comprehensive plan, including both the land use element and the community facilities chapter, support the project as to several goals and objectives. So we're requesting your approval of this, as is the school system, and they're sorry that they can't be here today. Thank you, Barb. Any questions for Barb on this PFR? Mr. Owens? I'm sorry, but I must. Barb, you mentioned it in what you just said, last paragraph on page three, state-of-the-art facilities for students. And then if you back up just a little bit, one of the additions, underground detention chambers. Is that for the students? No. Oh. I'm sorry. That's just parking. I had to ask. Probably because they're adding the parking they have to have detention, and that's about the only way they can do it. But, yeah, I'd say that's probably for the students. If they misbehave, they could. Okay. Yeah. That'll tame them down. Any other questions for Barb? We need a motion on this, right? Is that correct? To either accept or deny. Okay. All right. Mr. Chairman, I move that we accept PFR 2000-2 County Public Schools Cassidy Elementary School renovation. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. All opposed, please say no. Motion carries. Thank you very much, and they will thank you too. Thank you. I guess any staff items at this time? None, Mr. Chairman. Nothing to let you know I'm sitting in for Mr. King, who's home under the weather today. We certainly hope he will feel better and return to us soon. Thank you very much for your service today. Our well wishes to Mr. King. If he's watching, I hope he's feeling better. Thank you. Sure not. Okay. I guess there's no other commission items. Is there a motion for adjournment? I so move. All right. We're adjourned. All right. Okay. Jimmy. Jimmy. Do you not have pictures? I'm in large crowds, I look down to see where you are. I wanna cry, how can you talk When I get lost about the people all around I wanna cry Thank you. Thank you. What a time that it's clear, the future looks bright. On that train of graphite and glitter, on that sea by red. 90 minutes from New York to Paris, well back, 76 with feet, A-OK. What a beautiful world this will be. What a glorious time to be free. What a beautiful world this will be What a glorious time to be free Get your ticket to that wheel in space while there's time. The fix is in. You'll be a witness to that game of chance in the sky. You're watching Inside Look, and up next, it's an affair of the arts. The End My name is John Nicholas, and I'm the director of the Lexington chapter of the Barbershop Harmony Society. The name of the chorus is the Kentuckians Chorus. One of the things we do is we preserve a style of music that might otherwise be lost, and that is Barbershop Harmony, which started right around the turn of the last century in America. Well, I love to sing. I love harmony. I've done it all my life. And when I discovered Barbershop at 16 years old, I realized that that was what I needed. That's what gave me the most joy in music was the four-part harmony. And so I was hooked that day when I was 16 years old. So that was 30-something years ago. You mentioned the four-part harmony. What are the four parts? Well, the bass is at the bottom, and we have the baritones and the leads, and they generally swap places continually. And then we have the tenors, which are real high up there. What are some of the elements to really be good at this? Well, you've got to be able to hear. If you can hear a note and sing it back, that's the first step. You've got to be able to do that. Next, you need to be able to sing your part without influence from someone else so that you can sing harmony while someone else sings harmony with you. Those are two really big elements right there. But probably more than anything, you have to just be able to carry a tune. You've got to be able to carry a tune. We compete once or twice a year, depending on what we decide to do, but usually every spring for sure, and that's in the Indiana and Kentucky district, which we are in. It's called the Cardinal District, and we compete against other choruses that are in those two states. Well, I've been to your website, and it's really nice, very informative, and it says on there that you invite people to come on out and join and sing with you. Now, do you have to be really good to start here, or will you all help? We definitely help. We have a wide range of talent here. We have people who are trained musicians, and we have people that just sang in the shower. As long as they can carry a tune and have a fun attitude, they'll do fine. So, no, you don't have to be like a musical wizard or anything. Well, let's talk about that for a moment. If somebody would like to find out more about it or go to the website, could you give us a little information about that? Yeah, www.thekentuckians.org. I think that's probably the best way to do it. Just go look us up there. Every Tuesday night, it's a way to escape. It's a way to have fun. There's great camaraderie. And we are striving for excellence in music. And we are all experiencing the joy of singing, and we're preserving a style of music that we don't want to die. One, two, three. Well, well, well. Let's all go down to Dumas Walker. Let's all go down to Dumas Walker. We'll get a small burger, fries, and a bottle of ski. Bring it on out to my baby and me. Doom, doom, doom, doom, my baby and me. And we're headed to the driving on a Saturday night. Just me and my baby and a six-pack of light. I have a pocket full of money and I'm raring to go. Down to Dumas Walkers right after the show. They'll be shooting marbles in the back of the store. And laying money down on the floor. Let's all go down to Dumas Walkers. Let's all go down to Dumas Walkers. We'll get a saw, burger, fries, and a bottle of ski. Bring it on out to my baby and me. Doom, doom, doom, doom, my baby and me. He takes all his orders down to one at a time. Don't need a bag, he's got a photogenic mind. He don't like the young folks hanging around. He's quick to let you know we got a law in this town. You ought to see him grin when money walks to the door. The Marvel Kings are ready for more. Let's all go down to Dumas Walker. Let's all go, let's all go down to Dumas Walker. We'll give us all burger fries and a bottle of Ski. Bring it on out to my baby and me. Now I've got a hunger like you never saw. I need a bottle of whiskey, an order of fries, and a big tall burger with smoke. Lots and lots. My name's Alan Trout, and I'm the president of the Kentuckians. I've been a member now for about three years, and I really enjoy, first of all, singing and the joy of singing four-part harmony. But maybe equally or more importantly is the fellowship with all these guys. They're a great bunch of guys, and it's a lot of fun to get together and sing. What would you say to encourage folks to get them to come out here and be a part of this? Just come on out and sing. You don't need to have a musical background or a lot of talent in singing. If you don't think you can sing, come on down anyway. There's a place for you on the risers here. The competition that we do twice a year, once in the spring and once in the fall, a good opportunity to not only get the whole course together for an extended weekend, but also to connect with other barbershoppers from the Indiana and Kentucky area. just get together and sing songs all night long sometimes till 2, 3 o'clock in the morning. It's a lot of fun. We're probably in the top third in terms of size. There are a few courses in the Kentucky-Indiana district that are a little bit larger than us. And certainly in the United States, there are some courses that number well over 100. But we're a good-sized course. There's certainly many, many that are smaller in smaller communities. but I think we're a good size and we're growing too. We've added a lot of members in the last year or two and we're always bringing new folks in. The website is www.thekentuckians.org and just go to the website and get all the information on how to come sing with us and also for anyone that's interested in having the chorus come sing for them. We do church functions. Heck, the guys came and sang at my wedding recently So we do a lot of different things. My heart's all in the world. I could love you forever, it seems. Like a fashion play on Broadway. You came out with the sun's first gleam Sweet, sweet roses of morn You're the ideal of my dreams Like a fashion play on Broadway You came out with the sun's first gleam Sweet, sweet roses of roses of morn. To thee I belong. To thee I belong. My dreams thee I belong. Hi, everybody. I'm David Sullivan. The Lexington Fayette Urban County Government is working to make your access to government information better, faster, and more efficient. Watch closely, because things are changing for the better here at your city government. This is an inside look at your city and up next, Social Moments. Hello, my name is Cheryl Talbert and I am the director of the Division of Adult and Tenant Services with the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government. I am here today to bring awareness to National Social Work Month. March is National Social Work Month. One might ask, where would you find a social worker? Well, you can find a social worker working in different settings. You may find them working in the government, as with urban county government. You may find them working in health care with hospitals. You may find them in a school setting, different facets of government. You may even find them in political arenas. There are social workers with our U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senators. And someone might ask, what do social workers actually do? Again, there's a wide variety of activities associated with social workers. They may work directly with children. They may work directly with adults. They may work directly with the elderly, the seniors. They also may work in administration and management, developing the policies that need to be set for communities. They may work with lawmakers to change some of the laws that are set forth for social workers and the actual practice in the field. How are social workers distinguished from other helping professionals? Well, social workers are degreed individuals. These individuals have gone to a school of social work. They have obtained either a bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree in social work. 79% of those in the field of social work actually hold a social work license, which allows them to work in private practice in different settings. And why is there a need to focus on social work? Why is there a need for Professional Social Work Month? In 1984, the White House officially recognized March as National Professional Social Work Month. From 1984 until now, there have been different areas and themes that have been focused on. In 1984, the theme was listening to children. Whereas in 2009, the social work is what is the purpose and the possibility? Where can we take this field? How can the field continue to grow? The Department of Labor and Statistics indicate that the need for social workers is expected to grow and rise twice as fast as any other occupation, especially in gerontology, home health care, substance abuse, private practice, and school social work. The Department of Social Services with Urban County Government offers a wide range of social services. We have the Division of Youth Services that focus primarily with youth and some of the issues that they're having. We have the Division of Family Services that works with teen moms. And we also have the Division of Adult Services that works with adults in the community to offer a wide range of services. It may be case management services that people are looking for. It may be that people just don't know where to start, so they have to start somewhere. So if you're interested or know someone that's in need of services, please do not hesitate to contact the Department of Social Services with Lexington Fayette Urban County Government at 258-3800. So during the month of March, if you know a social worker, take time out and salute them for all the hard work that they do for themselves, for the client and the community that they serve. And to my fellow social workers in the community, I salute you as well. Thank you. Water bill, electric bill, mortgage, credit card bill. What's this credit card bill for? Water! What is it? Don't you know I'm watching the game? Well, I don't care. What could be more important than my game? These bills, that's what. What's this credit card bill for? More beer? What's your problem, boy? Don't you see me working on these bills? Sorry. I'm tired of your oops and I'm sorry's. You did that on purpose. I want you out of the house now. Dad? No buts. Just get out and stay out. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. CASA is a volunteer-driven advocacy service for abused and neglected children who have been removed from their homes. We do independent assessment and monitoring for the courts and follow these children throughout their duration in substitute care, advocating for the best interest of these children so that they can reach a permanent, safe home in the quickest manner possible. We have been operating in Lexington for 20-plus years. Right now I have about 50 active volunteers. We recruit, train, and then supervise those volunteers, have paid professional social workers who supervise the volunteer advocates. And the advocates are, like I said, follow these children for several years a lot of times, seeing them every month and making sure that they are doing well and that their needs are being met. In addition to the direct services that we provide, we also do public relation work and work for improving programming for children. And one of our signature events is the Light of Hope Candlelight Vigil, which we do in conjunction with programs all over the United States. We are part of a national association. We do that every Monday, the first Monday, I mean every April, the first Monday of the month. And it's a kickoff event for all the other child abuse prevention activities for that month, because April is Child Abuse Prevention Month. So that's a signature event for us. Usually the mayor joins us and does a proclamation, awards that to us. We have entertainment and guest speakers that night. Again, that's the first Monday, which this year is April the 6th. It's held down at the Courthouse Plaza. We start at about 6.30 that night outside by the water wall. I would like everybody to come down and join us and put some support behind these children who our community has a vast problem. We've had like 4,600 investigations of abuse and neglect in Fayette County last year. So we do have a definite problem in our community and would appreciate all the support and would like to invite the community to come down and join us. CASA is a part of a community collaboration of a lot of different programs throughout Fayette County, and different programs do do different activities. Prevent Child Abuse Kentucky. Their slogan this year is Pinwheels for Prevention. So you may see blue pinwheels all over the community. We usually have a resource fair. It's going to be held the 25th, and I think that's going to be at the Loudoun Street YMCA. Folks can come out and join us about 5 o'clock that day and learn about different programming all throughout the community. We do our Coins for Casa Kids campaign with Fayette County Schools, which children bring in coins and compete for their respective classrooms to win a pizza party, and we do that in conjunction with teaching children about child abuse and prevention with the schools. So blue ribbons are worn throughout the community in Simplons of the Month, so you may see a lot of blue ribbons throughout the community. And that is all national programming as Child Abuse Prevention Month is promoted all throughout the nation during April. CASA is continually recruiting new volunteer advocates to train. We are in the midst of training a new class right now, but we'll be doing another class this summer, probably about mid-July to run through the summer. And those advocates will be sworn in by a judge. We're doing a 10K run at Spindletop, September the 12th. But we will be training that class throughout midsummer through them. We're continually looking for new advocates to train. As I said, there's a lot of children who could use this voice and advocacy service, and we are continually recruiting. So if you're interested, please call us at 253-4334, or visit us at www.lexingtoncasa.com. You can keep up to date on our events or learn how that you can help us, whether that's you want to be recruited to be an advocate. If you'd like to sit on the board, we have openings for board members also. And as a nonprofit, we're always looking for donations in need of some financial backing. So please visit our website and open up your hearts and help us with these children. There's a vast need in our community. Thanks for watching an Inside Look. If you have any questions about anything you've seen, you can always call Lex. Call at 311 or visit us on the web at lexingtonky.gov. You're watching Government Channel 3, your award-winning link to the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government. Watch us online at lexingtonky.gov. We'll be right back. My name is James Wharton and I'm a treatment plant operator at West Hickman Wastewater Treatment Plant. I grew up on Ash Grove Pike and West Hickman Treatment Plant was originally built out here here in 1972. Since then it's had one, two, three, three expansions and it's going through a phase now of redesigning some of the tanks and operation of the plant. West Hickman is 33.8 million gallon a day plant with a peak design flow of 64 million gallons a day. It receives sewage from about 150,000 residents in Fayette County and some in northern Jessamine County. If you look at a map of Lexington, on the north end of town, Wes Tickman received sewage from Paris Pike on the north end of town, around New Circle Road to Hamburg, Richmond Road, Taste Creek, and on around to about Parker's Mill on the south end. Most of that's outside of New Circle. I think we have a small portion in the Richmond Road, Idliar area. West Hickman treatment plant is 269 acres. When it was originally built here, you know, the location was picked because it was a good spot for a sewer plant, but also it was a good spot with the 269 acres that we could land farm a lot of the sludge we put out. Well, as things progressed, you know, the EPA said you can't land farm anymore, so we went to other means of disposing of the waste. Now the main plant probably encompasses about 50 acres, 60 acres, and the rest of the place we really don't use for anything. We do raise soybeans, though, and do a little farming. We have a lot of wildlife. We have a, at one time, and I guess we still are, it was a bird sanctuary. We have a lot of bird watchers, people come out and they come out and count the ducks and geese and everything and we have a very large population of deer. In fact, Tuesday night I think I counted 11 of them over here all together, you know, at one time in one group and I have some others around other parts of the plant. The process, we're called an activated sludge wastewater system with our main focus on ammonia removal and phosphorus removal. We have a system, we have our influent pumps pump our flow in and then from there it drains to a biological phosphorus removal area where we change the chemical makeup of the phosphorus so that the bugs in the rest of the plant will consume our phosphorus along with our ammonia and nitrifiers. And hopefully it will go be pumped out to our presses and go to a landfill and you'll have clean water going to the creek. You might look at a wastewater treatment plant as basically everything comes in, settles out and is pumped out. But activated sludge wastewater plant uses microorganisms. You have nitrosomonas, nitrovactor bacteria that takes care of ammonia and nitrates and nitrites. And then you have phosphorus consuming microorganisms that eat the phosphorus. And then their waste and those microorganisms dying, they settle to the bottom of the tanks and we pump that out and we take it out of tractor trailers to landfill. And hopefully you don't have it going to the creek. Because our main focus is phosphorus removal and there's only two ways to get rid of phosphorus. That is, either you take it out on a tractor trailer or you take it out through the creek, and we don't want it going to the creek. Our permit right now is one milligram per liter of phosphorus going to the creek, where our design coming into the plant is about seven milligrams of phosphorus coming in. So we remove, you know, four to five milligrams per liter of phosphorus before it's put back in West Hickman Creek. Our waste goes to thickeners and we thicken it and then we put it on through presses and we, and finally it's put in tractor trailers and sent to a landfill. The landfill uses it as a cover. What they do is they mix it with their soil and everything as they're covering the landfills and they put it back in. The sludge from a wastewater treatment plant isn't the easiest thing in the world to get rid of because, like most landfills, they want a certain percentage. Like if you send one tractor trailer load of sludge, they want five tractor trailer loads of garbage to go with it. Because it is, as time goes on, it's going to be harder and harder to dispose of it. Operations at West Tickman consist of, we're here 24-7, 365 days a year. We have three shifts. We have a shift that starts at midnight, runs to 8 a.m., 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., and 4 p.m. to 12. We have one operator that operates the plant during those times. They basically, we monitor the, we do, they do two rounds of the plant each. Along with other points of the plant, they will check three. Chlorine and feed rates and stuff, they'll check three times a shift. And final clarifiers, they'll check four times a shift. We also have, on staff, we have electricians, maintenance mechanics. We have two electricians, nine maintenance mechanics, ten operators, and we run different shifts. We have people that come in here on a daily basis from 6 in the morning until midnight, depending on what their shift is. A typical day starts out, you basically walk the plant and check your equipment and change your feed rates on chemicals, adjust your finals to keep the blankets even, and you clean rags as they come in off the bar racks and stuff like that. We do much of our own maintenance. We have some contracting stuff. We do have a good fabricator and everything welding. we build, if it can be made out of stainless steel, aluminum or steel, we can build it here. And we do that for other parts of the city too. We have two really well experienced welders and then also our maintenance mechanics and electricians can go about any place in the city if they're called to. Frank, come here. Ever get one of those big fat checks in the mail? What you got? A check for $20,000. $20,000? Cash advance? Home equity? We could use the money, right? Yeah, we could always use the money, but 20, that's not sure what would be nice. Oh, definitely. Looks like a legitimate check. All you have to do is sign, and your money troubles are over. Looks like all I have to do is sign it. Don't, or you could lose your home. Don't borrow trouble. Call 1-866-830-7868. We have been removing our older Influent screw pumps. They were put in in 1990, and they had reached their life, you know. And we started removing them, and we've installed a different type of Wimco hydrostol pump. It pumps half of what the screw pump pumps, but we're able to put two pumps in the same pit. And what they have, I think, you know, at this time, we may not be seeing the effect from them. I think in the future we will, that they're going to be much more efficient on electricity. And also, they're going to be much more, they're going to be a large improvement over odor control because it's a closed system where the screw pump has open vents and hopefully it will help our odor control system and our odors for our neighbors. Like the Wimco pumps, that was an improvement and it's, you know, that was 1990s when the screw pumps were put in. We put in these Wimco pumps in 2006 and 2008. And we're slowly beginning to, we put in, in the late 90s, we put in different type of air diffusers in our aeration tanks that are more efficient. And we are slowly going through the plant and changing VFDs that are put in in 1980, changing them to what it is in 2009, which is much more efficient operating. It operates much cooler, it operates with less electricity, and we're slowly beginning to turn and change that. We'd like to change our blowers and go to a more efficient blowers, but that may be off in the next four to five years. A VFD is a variable phase controller for your pumps, and you can run it a couple of different ways. run it in auto and it will ramp up and start the pump. Where if you don't have a VFD, when a pump comes on, it comes on at 100% speed, filling all your electric. With a VFD, you can start it out slow and bring it up slowly and it doesn't use as much energy. With our electric bill with Kentucky utilities, we have surcharges for ... We have a flat rate on what we pay for electricity, but if we turn around and start a 400-gallon motor at one minute and then come back five minutes later and start another one, we get a surcharge for that. With the VFDs, we wouldn't have to do that, and we don't have to with our new pumps. But it just takes time to change all that. Whenever you're dealing with changing pumps or anything and you say electric, that doubles the cost, triples the cost sometimes. In the future, we want to put in a SCADA system that will have more control where we can turn pumps off, open valves, close valves. I think we will probably see in the future that our plant will start taking care of some of the storm sewer systems around Lexington, either through some type of holding tanks and slowly bringing it through the plant, or changing our lagoons over and using them, some of that nature. I think we'll have a major part, will be a major part of the future expansion and work on the sewer system and storm sewer system ramlexing. Any type tour, in fact we usually do four or five a year of kids groups, camps, summer camps. You can call West Tickman Wastewater Treatment Plant at 272-1713 or you can also call 311. We do tours, all size groups, all age groups, and we try to tool the tour to the type of group we have. As a part of the LFUCG's ongoing efforts to beautify the downtown area, improve the quality of life of its citizens, and make Lexington a more inviting place for visitors, a group composed of both public and private interests, have come together to develop the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan. Acting Commissioner of Public Works Mike Webb explains what it's all about. If you take a walk out there today, it really helps you to understand what the Streetscape Project is all about. The circa for the sidewalks, curbs that we have in the core of downtown is basically, most of it was replaced in 1970 and it's worn out. It has reached its lifespan. And in the last couple years there has been a growing interest in doing replacement work and at the same time not just replacing hard surfaces but to make Lexington a nicer place to be, a destination if you will, that included amenities that would encourage people to come downtown, to spend time downtown. We encourage businesses to relocate in the downtown area. It really got rolling about two years ago when a group of folks started putting together what would need to be done to create a great change in downtown, in the streetscape of downtown. And through that, there were some significant things that were done. This group investigated how that was done in other cities. And they determined what the target area should be. They understood that to do this, it would involve quite a bit of engineering work and all the utilities that are in the downtown area. And when you talk about utilities, you're talking about the ones people typically think of, like gas, electric, cable, telephone. But also utilities that are involved are the sanitary sewers and the storm sewers and other utilities owned by LFUCG, for instance, fiber optic cable that they use to operate their signalized intersections. That is where we are currently today, is really in the first phases of four projects that were selected to be in the first phase of streetscape development and construction. The group's findings were then split up into four phases, which are in essence four different areas that will be focused on for the plan. Mr. Webb talks about the areas identified for phase one of construction and what will be done there. The projects in the first phase were identified to be along the Main Street corridor from Broadway to Elm Tree Lane, on Vine Street from Broadway to Limestone, the Limestone corridor from Avenue of Champions to 4th Street, and then the Cheapside Park area between the park that lies adjacent to Cheapside, between the courthouse and Cheapside. What we're looking at doing is creating a better pedestrian space that would accommodate bicycle traffic, so additional bike lanes in the target areas, would include more sidewalk space for amenities like rain gardens, trees, better parking schemes for people. And in areas like limestone that has overhead utilities today, a different lighting scheme for those that would have standard street lights or something akin to what's on Main and Vine Street. We have at this time an estimate that was created by the design consultant, KKG. They have done other projects similar to this, and as part of their contract, they, on a regular basis, produce estimates for construction. We have used their estimates to create a capital plan for this. However, we believe that there will be a lot of opportunities for grants to help fund this, but you have to have the plan available before you can apply for the grant. And we're getting to the point in our design phase where we can start applying for grants. We believe that the rain gardens are potentials for EPA grants to help manage stormwater, and our designs will incorporate whenever possible the control of stormwater and the ability to filter it through rain gardens before it hits a storm sewer. We also believe that there may be potential for some transportation grants for some of the additional additions to the streets like bike lanes to help do striping and other things, signage that you'll need for the streetscape. Additional phases would include the ends of Main Street from Newtown Pike onto Broadway would be a phase that would include Triangle Park, would be a couple blocks of Broadway, Upper Mill between Short and Vine, Main Street from Elm Tree onto Midland Avenue. I can't emphasize enough how much the utilities and the government and the contractors have to coordinate to make this construction take place. It's a very large construction project if you look at the entire project area. So moving along, and we're really, we will hopefully be in construction on some phase of it, possibly sometime this summer or later in the year. And getting your feet wet in this and seeing how the first project goes will help us design around problems that we have with the first project. We'll be right back. What you don't see are the hours of training and coordination that go on behind the scenes in order to keep both the LFUCG's employees and you, the citizens, safe. Emma Shea Turley of the Division of Waste Management talks about the most common hazards involved in day-to-day operations and what can be done to prevent accidents. As far as the Division of Waste Management is concerned, safety is a very high top priority on our list because we're out there working in all types of weather, year-round, day, night. We also have a nighttime crew that works in the downtown area. Our number one safety hazard at this time is traffic. So what we've done, we had a speed limit put in place, the 25 mile speed limit in the work zone. And we're having a lot of people that do not adhere to that. So hopefully public that are watching would be mindful that they do have the 25 mile per hour speed limit and watch for the workers. We have more than one truck, so you may see a garbage truck, rear and load truck in your area, but when that truck leaves the area, we still have the yard waste and then we have the recycling crews that come out to the areas. So we would hope that the public would be mindful of that. So, and we do do a training out on the old Frankfort Pike training pad so that you're going to be trying to watch for traffic while you work. You want to stay as close to the curbside as possible, but it's not always feasible. The other thing is when we have our residents putting improper or dangerous materials inside our containers, we have found a lot of ammunition, chemicals, things of that nature, actually snakes and case of rob. People throw away everything. But what we ask you to do is to be mindful. Urban County government has deemed, if you have a question about your chemicals at proper disposal, we ask that you make that phone call so that you're disposing these things properly. We have a lot of gases and fumes from mixed items that's placed in the trash that causes harm to our workers. So we want to be mindful of that as well. I do stress the importance of watching out for pedestrians and children, and especially when school is out. But we need people to look for the workers as well as we're watching for others. So what we ask you to do, if you could keep a 50-foot following distance behind our refuge trucks, that's going to give you a safety cushion as well as our employees to be able to see you. We of course utilize our safety equipment, our Hive-Viz vests, orange jumpsuits. We're trying to make sure that we're as safe as possible, but there's only so much you can do. So we have educated our employees on what to do to be safe, but we need to make sure that this is getting out to the residents. As far as hazardous materials, we have educational brochures. We have information that we're more than glad to mail to you if you ask us for those to let the public know. For your Herbie, you should not exceed 200 pounds in weight. You don't want to put ammunition, chemicals, things of that nature on the inside of your cart. Same thing for recycling. get a lot of illegal materials placed in the recycling bin, and they put that in the bottom, and then they disguise it, and they'll put, let's say, newspapers on the top. So when the employee goes to test the load, sometimes they may receive a strain because there's improper materials. And then, of course, with the Lenny. Everything comes with some kind of structure to it. So we want to make sure that our residents in Lexington are placing this debris out correctly. As a result of improperly disposed of items, as well as hazards that are not as easy to spot, solid waste workers can be injured. Ms. Turley talks about some of the injuries sustained by workers during the last five years. We've had injuries, back strains, upper and lower thorac, lumbar, strains from improper materials being placed hidden in the containers. We've had employees injured from animals chasing them and or biting them. So we want to make sure that we keep our animals leashed if they're going to be outside, especially for an extended period of time. We've had cuts, lacerations to fingers, face. We've had knee injuries. Due to the nature of their job, employees in the field have to deal directly with the elements and are out in all manner of conditions, from bitter cold to scorching heat and everything in between. Ms. Turley discusses the steps that are taken to ensure safety in all weather conditions. We do tell the employees that they want to make sure that they always have on their skid-resistant sold boots, so you have good traction, and you want to walk with your heel-to-toe. However, the problems we have when we get out in the field is people don't salt, and we're going out very early, so a lot of people are still asleep. so people are not salting the containers are frozen to the ground of course sometimes you can't service the container because the debris on the inside of it is actually frozen so if you bag your debris it's a lot easier for us to pick it up in inclement weather but if you would place your carts out and at least leave the two to three foot in between them it makes it easier for people to service your carts however now we're working in inclement weather it's very very cold extremely cold and we're still working. I mean, it can be wind chills 10 below and we have crews out. So if you would put those containers out where they're easily accessible, it makes it easier and safer for our collectors to collect. But we do try to tell them to take their time when they're walking on these surfaces, but then you have your unknowns of black ice, of course, and it's not been salted. So it's very dangerous for us during the winter weather. In the summertime, we want to make sure that they take frequent breaks as well as in the wintertime. But we want them to stay hydrated. You know, if you're not drinking a Gatorade, drink water. Try to get plenty of that every 15 to 20 minutes, simply because the type of work that we do, you're going to lose a lot of your fluids through sweat. So we want to make sure that they do stay hydrated during that time, take breaks, and if they have to, maybe go inside of a store so they can actually cool off, let the body temperature to come down. We also tell workers that have people working with them, be mindful, watch for your co-worker, watch for signs, whether it's hypothermia and or you are sweating profusely in the summertime. We ask that each employee kind of be their brother's keeper, per se. Ms. Turley concludes with a reminder to residents of what can be done to help keep LFUCG's employees and themselves safe. Watch your speeds. You want to stay back at least 50 foot, not to exceed the 25-mile speed limit. And then the other thing is to make sure that you're setting your containers out in the correct manner so we can service you in a safe and prudent manner and that we're not going to damage your property. A lot of times the carts are placed too close to the mailbox and or a parked vehicle, so we want to make sure that if you're putting it out there where we can service it safely, that we're going to pick you up and we're going to have a good rapport with our public as well as training our employees. Lexington 9-1-1, where is your emergency? Lexington 911, where is your emergency? Hi, welcome back to Safe and Secure. My name is David Jarvis and I am the Director of Code Enforcement for Lexington Fayette Urban County Government. Today we want to cover some issues relating to Chapter 12 that deal with nuisance issues in Fayette County. We want to cover trash and debris, weeds, grass over 12 inches, junk vehicles, and signs in the right-of-way. The Division of Code Enforcement has five dedicated officers and one supervisor. They're all sworn officers, and they enforce Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances that deal with nuisance-related issues. In Fayette County, you can be cited for nuisance-related issues. The property can be fined for violators, and the property owner can have the property abated and the cost passed on back to the owner. Once a notice is issued, property owners have 14 days to comply with the notice. At the end of the 14 days that the property owner hasn't complied, a civil penalty can be issued and the city again can't abate the property and put a lien on the property if the fine is not paid. All notices can be appealed through our administrative hearing process and all civil penalties can be appealed. Abatements cannot be appealed. Once a property is abated, the property owner sent a bill and then they have to pay the bill. Some of the issues that would trigger a citation would be trash, as you see here in the front yard of this property, junk vehicles. A vehicle that is considered to be junk is unlicensed, currently, or inoperable. Flat tires, that sort of thing. We also deal with indoor furniture stored outdoors. That could be overstuffed furniture, it could be appliances. Anything that's not intended to be outdoors can fall under the indoor furniture guideline. Other issues could be signs in the public right of way. would be these little two-by-two signs on wire that are out in the median that are illegal under chapter 12. Again, my name is David Jarvis, and thanks again for watching another episode of Safe and Secure. The Metro Employees Credit Union is free to all employees of the urban county government and partner agencies. Our members experience the credit union difference with free checking and free online banking with bill pay. You can even use your ATM or debit card at over 90 ATM locations in the Lexington area with no fees. The Metro Employees Credit Union has two locations, downtown in the Phoenix Building and the newest location in the Versailles Road Government Campus. Looking for a better way to handle your finances? Then it's time you discovered the credit union difference. Welcome back to Safe and Secure. I'm Officer Ann Gutierrez, and today I'm excited to tell you about a proven search and rescue program that's available here in Fayette County for those with special needs and those with dementia-related disorders who may wander and become lost. It only takes a minute for your loved one or someone that you're caring for to slip out a door and become lost and wander. Project Lifesaver is here to help. This is a truly cooperative public safety and community effort. You'll see on your screen some of our partners that make this program possible. Today I have with me Officer Stephen Gontz, who is the coordinator for the Project Lifesaver program here at the police department. Thank you, Officer Gontz, for being with us today. Thank you. Can you tell us a little bit about how this program works? Basically, the client, once enrolled in the program, they wear a transmitter that's about the size of an average wristwatch and it emits a signal 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And that way, if they go wandering or get lost, we are able to go out with our tracking equipment and hone in on that signal. Great. And this is a cooperative effort, so we have folks from all of public safety that are going to be out looking for this person. the sheriff's department, the fire department, and police working together to find the client that's wearing the transmitter. Absolutely. Have you got a transmitter with you today that you could show us? Actually, yes, I do. Perfect. This transmitter is what emits the signal that alerts our rescue team, correct? Like I say, every second of every day, that transmitter does emit a radio signal that we can track with our equipment. Great. So, and that is something, is that worn on your wrist? How would the clients wear that? It's actually built for comfort, I like to say, because it can be worn on a wrist, it can be worn on an ankle, or if we have other types of special needs where somebody doesn't feel comfortable wearing it on a wrist or an ankle, we can get a little creative and put it somewhere. Okay, great, great. So, and also it looks a little medical. So for, I guess, folks that are really concerned about appearance and, you know, wearing it on an ankle may be a good alternative for them. Sure. It's easily concealable if you wear a long shirt underneath a cuff or if it's on an ankle. The pants obviously will do that. And during the warm weather, if somebody's wearing their shorts, then all they have to do is pull the socks up over top of it. Great. Great. How long does an average search take with that equipment? I know back in 2005 we had a gentleman that went missing, was an older gentleman with Alzheimer's, went missing. The search at that time for public safety, fire and police lasted, I think, three days. The gentleman was found deceased about 100 yards from his home in a wooded area. He obviously did not at that time have this equipment. This wasn't available in Fayette County at that point. Right. I know that's something that spurred the police department into looking at some programs to help. Is that approximately when this program started? Right. Right after that, we realized there was a need for something better, something that could actually be proactive, get out there and find somebody, instead of some of the other programs where they actually have to be located first. So we started looking at this program. Actually, I believe it was you started looking at this program and brought it here to Fayette County. And on an average search without the equipment, three days is about the national average, three to five days. With the equipment, though, a three to five day search is whittled down to about a 20 minute search. Oh, that's fantastic. Absolutely. Especially when you're looking at weather conditions like today when it's 20 degrees outside. Absolutely. Extreme weather conditions, warm or cold can be deadly for some people. Now, our police helicopter can also become involved in the search. How does that help you? Oh, that helps tremendously. We've got the equipment on the helicopter now, and once they're airborne, it dramatically increases the range that we can pick up this signal. The signal on the average police car is about a mile range, so we have to get within a mile of the person to receive the signal. With the helicopter in the air, the signal is actually able to be tracked seven to ten miles away, depending on the weather conditions. Oh, that's tremendous. So it's about seven times more effective in the helicopter. Okay. And tell us just a little bit about your current clientele, not naming anyone, but just what makes them eligible for the program? Right now we have 24 people signed up in Fayette County for the program. The main thing that the program started with was obviously Alzheimer's disease because at a certain point with Alzheimer's, somebody will get out, wonder, and get lost. And that seemed to be the most extensive type of search that we had. But we've also expanded into children with autism. We have a client that's five years old on the program right now that will just run out of their home right now. We also have people with traumatic brain injuries. They've been in a car wreck, and it's almost the same type of symptoms. Short-term memory loss. Just about any type of medical illness that would cause somebody to walk and forget where they're at is eligible for this type of program. Great. So it's a wide variety of clients, and we definitely have room for more. Absolutely. How would someone become, would enroll in the program? How would someone who wanted to be involved get involved in this program? They can call any of the emergency services here in Lexington. They can call the fire department, the sheriff's department, or the police department. Probably the easiest thing to do is contact the local police department at 258-3600 and ask about Project Lifesaver, and they will generally be transferred directly to my office. And I will talk to them, inform them of the responsibilities of the caregivers, and make sure that someone is eligible for the program. And then we will also go over the cost issue. The cost issue associated with the program is there's a $300 setup fee, which is the price of the equipment. With the $300 fee, you get the first month's battery for free, which the battery lasts about 30 days. The battery change after that costs $8 a month. But the thing is, here in Fayette County, we have established a scholarship program. So, therefore, the people that can't afford the $300 or the $8 a month, We actually have donations from local organizations and local people that allow us to be able to go on a case-by-case basis and possibly provide up to the entire $300 to get someone enrolled in the program that truly needs it. That's great. So how do businesses go about work?