Council Environmental Quality Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Environmental Quality Committee met on April 23, 2013, at 12:00 AM, with Stinnett presiding. The committee addressed six agenda items during the meeting, taking two votes and hearing one public comment.

The committee approved the March 19, 2013 Committee Summary and received informational presentations on the Zero Waste Initiative and Monthly Financials. Three items were deferred for future consideration: the Distillery District Feasibility Study, Consolidate Greenspace Responsibilities, and Items Referred.

Attendance

Present: Stinnett, Mossotti, Gorton, Akers, Scutchfield, Myers, Clarke, Henson, Lane, Kay

Absent: Farmer

Late: None

Votes and Decisions

Approval of the February 12, 2013 Committee Summary 5:03

A motion to approve the February 12, 2013 Committee Summary was made by Farmer and seconded by Farmer. The motion passed unanimously. All ten members voted in favor: Stinnett, Mossotti, Gorton, Akers, Farmer, Scutchfield, Myers, Clarke, Henson, and Lane. No members voted against or abstained.

Postponement of the Hard to Recycle Materials Item 4:00

A motion to postpone the Hard to Recycle Materials item was made by Myers and seconded by Gorton. The motion passed unanimously. All ten members voted in favor: Stinnett, Mossotti, Gorton, Akers, Farmer, Scutchfield, Myers, Clarke, Henson, and Lane. No members voted against or abstained.

Budget and Financial Actions

The meeting included consideration of the following financial items:

Appropriations - Greenway maintenance budget request for FY14: $117,000

Contracts - FEMA floodplain update study: $400,000 - Utility company summit and partnership facilitation: $25,000 - Sanitary sewer service evaluation: $25,000 - Stream revitalization watershed-based plan: $175,000

The total value of contracts under consideration was $625,000, with the appropriation request bringing the total financial actions to $742,000.

Public Comment

Katie Stites addressed the council regarding drainage issues at 386 Waller Avenue 1:54:59. Ms. Stites reported that a city-owned drainage ditch on or near her property is blocked and improperly maintained, causing ongoing drainage problems. She requested that the city intervene to resolve the issue before she proceeds with private repairs.

Ms. Stites noted that she has paid $4,800 in water quality fees and stated that she is not responsible for the ditch maintenance under Ordinance 16-88. Her comments indicated that she views the drainage problem as a city responsibility requiring municipal action rather than a private matter.

Contested Items

FEMA Floodplain Update and Development Viability

Council members engaged in a heated discussion regarding the FEMA floodplain study and its implications for development in the West District. The core disagreement centered on the critical importance of completing the floodplain study as a prerequisite for enabling private investment in the area.

The debate reflected competing concerns among council members. Some emphasized the necessity of the FEMA floodplain study for attracting private investment and moving development forward in the West District. Others raised concerns about the time required to complete the study and the associated costs, questioning whether these resources could be justified given budget constraints and development timelines.

A key point of contention was the need for city leadership to resolve uncertainties surrounding the floodplain study before private investors would commit to projects in the West District. Council members disagreed on how to balance the importance of obtaining accurate floodplain data against the practical need to move forward with development opportunities and attract investment to the area.

The discussion highlighted tensions between ensuring proper environmental and flood risk assessment through a comprehensive FEMA study and the desire to expedite development and economic activity in the West District. No specific outcome or resolution was documented in the available meeting materials.

March 19, 2013 Committee Summary

5:03

The committee reviewed the corrected February 12, 2013 summary during this agenda item. The revised document included corrections to spelling, punctuation, and financial figures from the original version.

Key Speakers: - Farmer - Scutchfield - Clarke

Outcome:

The committee unanimously approved the corrected February 12, 2013 summary. Farmer made the motion to approve, which was seconded by Farmer.

Zero Waste Initiative

The Leadership Lexington Zero Waste project team presented a strategic plan for achieving zero waste in Lexington 5:34. The presentation, featuring speakers including Jennifer Cave and Cheryl Norton, outlined a comprehensive approach centered on four main components: education, expanded recycling, organics processing, and policy changes.

The committee demonstrated strong support for the initiative and engaged with the presenters on several key implementation questions. Discussion focused on funding mechanisms, the practical steps for rolling out the plan, and strategies for engaging the private sector in zero waste efforts.

Committee members Stinnett, Gorton, Clark, Akers, Henson, Mossotti, and Myers participated in the discussion, raising concerns and seeking clarification on various aspects of the proposal.

Outcome

The committee agreed to move forward with the Zero Waste Initiative plan. They requested that the project team prepare two additional deliverables:

• A business case analysis
• An administrative update on implementation progress

The informational presentation resulted in clear committee support for advancing the zero waste strategy in Lexington.

Distillery District Feasibility Study

Strand Associates presented findings from a feasibility study on the Distillery District 34:32. The presentation covered three trail alternatives for the district, along with identified challenges and recommendations for moving forward.

Key Findings and Challenges

The study identified significant constraints affecting development in the district:

• Floodplain challenges that would impact project viability
• Utility constraints requiring coordination with existing infrastructure

Recommendations

Strand Associates recommended several early action items to address identified obstacles:

• A FEMA floodplain update to clarify flood risk designations
• Utility coordination to resolve infrastructure constraints

Committee Discussion and Outcome

The committee, which included speakers Mike Woolen, Cleet Binken, Chase Wright, Andy Knight, Poulsen, Akers, Clark, Mossotti, and Van Meter Pettit, discussed the feasibility study findings.

The committee voted to keep the study in committee rather than advance it immediately. The committee requested:

• The full feasibility report from Strand Associates
• Administrative input on budgeting and next steps for the project

The matter was deferred, allowing time for additional review and administrative analysis before further action.

Consolidate Greenspace Responsibilities

1:30:06

The committee discussed the consolidation of greenway maintenance responsibilities during this agenda item.

Key Discussion Points

The committee addressed the need to streamline greenway maintenance operations. A primary recommendation emerged to transfer maintenance responsibilities to the Division of Parks. Additionally, the committee considered creating a new Greenway Coordinator position that would report directly to the Planning Commissioner.

Speakers

The discussion involved multiple committee members, including Susan Bush, Chris Cooperrider, Akers, Henson, and Kaye.

Outcome

The committee agreed to defer this item and keep it in committee for further review rather than taking immediate action. This allows for additional consideration of the consolidation proposal and the proposed organizational changes before a final decision is made.

Monthly Financials

55:00

The committee reviewed monthly financial reports for multiple funds during this agenda item. The funds discussed included:

• Sanitary Sewer Operating Fund
• Sanitary Sewer Capital Fund
• Landfill Fund
• Water Quality Fund

Key Speakers

O'Mara and Lane participated in the discussion of the monthly financials.

Discussion Points

Lane raised a suggestion to expand the scope of the financial review. Specifically, Lane proposed including the Urban Services Fund in the monthly financial reporting. Additionally, Lane recommended that the committee establish a practice of reviewing financials on a monthly basis to improve oversight of fund performance.

Outcome

This agenda item was informational in nature. The committee reviewed the presented financial information without a formal decision or action item being recorded as a result of the discussion.

Items Referred

The committee discussed several referred items during this portion of the meeting 2:00:02. Key speakers included Stinnett, Gorton, and Akers.

The discussion covered multiple topics requiring further committee attention:

• Capacity Analysis — The committee reviewed capacity-related matters and determined additional research was needed.

• Waste Management Funding Options — The committee examined various funding approaches for waste management and decided to continue deliberation.

• Drainage Maintenance Issues — Drainage concerns, including specific issues with drainage ditches, were discussed as items requiring ongoing attention.

• Distillery District — This referred item was also discussed, with the committee opting to maintain it in committee status.

Outcome

The committee deferred most referred items, choosing to keep them in committee for further research and updates rather than taking immediate action. This approach allowed additional time for staff analysis and committee consideration before final decisions would be made on these matters.