[00:16:08] THE PROBLEM IS NOT COMING UP FOR ME FOR SOME BREATHING IN JUST SITTING HERE SPINNING I MET HIM. [00:16:13] 10 POINTS BOAT. [00:16:46] METRO TV WILL BEGIN IN APPROXIMATELY 45 SECONDS. [00:17:45] GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE. I'M COUNCILWOMAN MADONNA FLOOD [Call to Order] CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M JOINED BY MY VICE CHAIR, VIRTUALLY, COUNCILMAN SCOTT READ [Roll Call] BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS. PHILLIP BAKER. COUNCILMAN RENO WEBER, VIRTUALLY COUNCILMAN COUNCILWOMAN BETSY RUI, COUNCILMAN ROBIN ENGEL AND COUNCILMAN KHALIL THAT SHOWN THIS MEETING IS BEING THIS MEETING IS BEING HELD PERCENT TO KRS 61.826 AND COUNCIL RULE FIVE. A WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF HOUSEKEEPING BEFORE WE GET STARTED ITEM NUMBER EIGHT ON THE AGENDA SPONSORSHIP, AND EVEN THOUGH IT SHOWS ON THE AGENDA, THE SPONSORSHIP HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN SO IT WILL DROP OFF AT OUR NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING. WE'VE ALSO BEEN JOINED BY COUNCILMAN COREY ARTHUR, WHO HAS LEGISLATION. UM, ON OUR AGENDA TODAY. OUR FIRST ORDER OF [Pending Legislation] BUSINESS IS AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE ZONING AND PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 5024 AND 5026, SOUTH THIRD STREET AND 307 WEST KINGSTON AVENUE CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.429 ACRES AND BEING A LITTLE METRO CASE NUMBER 23 ZONE 0065 AND THAT WAS TABLED AT OUR LAST MEETING, SO THE MOTION WILL BE THE UNTIE TABLE TABLE. PROBABLY MADE BY COUNCILMAN ENGLAND SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BAKER AND WE'RE READY FOR THIS GET WELL, A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION, I GUESS TURNED OVER TO YOU, COUNCILWOMAN RUIZ. OKAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS HAS BEEN, UM INTERESTING REZONING IN OUR DISTRICT WITH A LOT OF QUESTIONS SURROUNDING IT. AND HAVING JUST SPOKEN WITH ATTORNEY TRAVIS FEASTER. WE ARE ABLE TO GET A BINDING ELEMENT ADDED TO IT, THE BUILDERS GOING TO WORK ON A PARKING AGREEMENT WITH THE ADJACENT UH ARBY'S RESTAURANT, WHICH WILL CERTAINLY EASE THE PARKING CONCERNS THERE. I HAVE BEEN OVER. I'VE WATCHED THE DISMISSAL AND THE BEGINNING OF SCHOOL. AND UM, ALL THE CONCERNS AROUND TRAFFIC, AND I REALLY DO NOT SEE THOSE CONCERNS AS EXISTING SO WITH THAT BINDING ELEMENT I'M GOING TO ASK YOU ABOUT YES. ON THIS. OKAY COLLEAGUES. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE LAST TIME SINCE IT WAS HEARD [00:20:04] SINCE SO, THEN I THINK, CHERYL, WE'RE READY TO VOTE. OKAY. I'M SORRY. OH, YES. I'M SORRY. ARE YOU DOING? QUITE ALRIGHT? WE DIDN'T GET THIS ONE ON ON THE SYSTEM. QUITE TRAVESTIES ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY, UM SO NEW, BINDING ELEMENT NUMBER EIGHT. UH, WOULD READ THAT THE AWARD SHOULD BE UNDERSIZED DEVELOPER. GIVE ME JUST A SECOND HERE. UM, YEAH, UNDER SLASH DEVELOPER, UM. SHALL USE COMMERCIALLY REASONABLE EFFORTS TO PURSUE A PARKING AGREEMENT WITH ADJACENT OR NEARBY. CRUCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. UM, WITH A MINIMUM OF FIVE SPACES. AND THEN BY ANY ELEMENT NUMBER. NINE WOULD BE THE STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT. WHICH I WILL ALSO READ ANY SIGNIFICANT INCREASES THE PRO STRUCTURES G, INCREASING THE BUILDING HEIGHT, NUMBER OF UNITS, NUMBER BUILDINGS, ANY INCREASE IN DENSITY ON THE PROPERTY, AND HE CHANGES IN USE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR SUBCOMMITTEE THEREOF, AND OR ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE MAIN ELEMENTS OTHER THAN I, THE ADDITION OF NEW BINDING ELEMENTS TO I CHANGES TO BINDING ELEMENTS THAT MERELY UPDATE THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR THREE. I UPDATING A PREVIOUS VERSION OF THIS BINDING ELEMENT TO REFLECT THE CURRENT LANGUAGE SHALL BE REVIEWED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WITH FINAL ACTION TO BE DETERMINED BY METRO COUNCIL. I'LL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. THOSE TWO AMENDMENTS. PROPERLY MOVED IN SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE BINDING ELEMENT SIGNIFY BY SAYING, AYE. I WAS OPPOSED BY LIKE SIGN HEARING NONE. THE MOTION PASSES. NOW WE'RE READY TO VOTE FOR. AND WE'LL ALSO WE'VE BEEN JOINED BY COUNCILMAN KUMAR RASHAD. WELCOME, KUMAR. COMMITTEE MEMORY. NO WEBER. BECAUSE SOME. VOTING CLOSED. OBJECTION VOTING IS CLOSING. THERE ARE SEVEN YES VOTES, AND THIS WILL GO TO OLD BUSINESS THAT OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER TWO. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, COUNCILMAN REED WELL, HE'S NOT ON THERE. CAN YOU? UM WATCH THE COMMITTEE FOR A MINUTE BECAUSE CINDY FOWLER WAS COLUMN AND SHE HAS AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA AND I NEED TO GO CALL AND MAKE SURE THAT SHE WANTS US TO HOLD IT OR WHAT COULD YOU DO THAT AFTER I READ IT INTO THE RECORD? COUNCIL. I DON'T NUMBER TWO IS AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO ZONING ON PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 94 8 AND 9500 BARDSTOWN ROAD CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 9.28 ACRES AND BEING A LITTLE METRO CASE NUMBER 22 ZONES 0105. PROOF. PROBABLY MOVING A SECOND BY COUNCIL THAT SEAN AND COUNCILMAN BAKER, WE'RE READY FOR DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON. BRIAN DAVIS, LOUISVILLE METRO OFFICE OF PLANNING. THIS IS PLAYING FISHING DOCKET NUMBER 22 ZONE, 105. FOR THE FREEZE BARDSTOWN ROAD PROJECT, THE PROJECT PROPERTY IN QUESTIONS 94 08 9500 OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD IS LOCATED METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT 22. THIS IS AN OUTLINE OF THE TWO SUBJECT PROPERTIES OUTLINED AND RED HERE ON THE AERIAL PHOTO. YOU CAN SEE THAT THE PROPERTIES ARE VACANT ONES. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THE AFRICAN IS PROPOSING TO CHANGE THESE TWO RESIDENTIAL USES. THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING MAP IN THE AREA. SO, UM A PORTION OR A PORTION OF THE PROPERTIES ARE C ONE AND THEN THERE'S ALSO SOME ARE FOUR. SO THE PURPLE YOU SEE ON THE MAP HERE THAT THAT'S THE C ONE AREA AND THEN THE YELLOWS ARE FOUR AFRICAN IS PROPOSING TO CHANGE THE ZONING, UH, THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE SITE ARE SIX. SO THE REQUEST BEFORE WE USE THE CHANGES OWNING OUR FOREIGN C 12 R SIX. WAS PROPOSING 100 AND 52 MULTI FAMILY DWELLINGS OR 9.28 ACRES, THE HOME AND THE BARN THAT IS ON 94 08 BARS DOWN THE ROAD OR IS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED. THE AFRICAN IS PROPOSING A CONNECTION CONNECTION TO THE WEST. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS DISCUSSED THROUGHOUT MANY OF THE MEETINGS THAT WHEN THIS ONE WENT BEFORE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, UM BUT THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT. UM SO YOU HAVE 152 UNITS FOR MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SCATTERED AROUND THE SITE. THERE IS A CLUBHOUSE AND OPEN SPACE IN THE CENTER. AND THEN THE STUB TO THE WEST IS THIS AREA ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE? UH, THEY ARE NOT CONNECTING THIS STUB TO OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD AT THIS TIME. BUT IF AND WHEN THERE SHOULD BE DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST, AND THEN IF THAT WOULD BE CONNECTED TO ALLOW CIRCULATION [00:25:05] TO THE TO THE PROPERTIES OF THE WEST. THESE ARE SOME OF THE RENDERINGS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING. THIS IS A PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THEN THIS IS THE SELLER SUBJECT PROPERTY IS FURTHER TO THE NORTH OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE ON IT. THE APPLICANT CONDUCTED THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ON JULY 14TH 2022. MOST RECENTLY. THIS WENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE ON AUGUST 24TH 2023. I SAY THAT BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS WAS ONE THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD REQUESTED SEVERAL CHANGES OF EARLIER IN THE YEAR AND SO IT KIND OF WENT AWAY. THEY MADE SOME REVISIONS, AND THEN THEY CAME BACK. AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 5TH 2023. THE MOTION WAS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CHANGING ZONING FROM OUR FOREIGN C. 12 R SIX AND THAT PASSED BY VOTE OF 7 TO 0. THAT'S ALL THAT HAPPENS. HEAVY QUESTIONS FOR ME. COUNCILMAN BRIAN THIS IS IN COUNCILMAN ENGELS DISTRICT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK OF THIS? I THINK. THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN. MADAM CHAIR. UH, THIS 11 QUESTION. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS. BUT IF I COULD JUST JUST ASK THE QUESTION I DID HEAR THE PRESENTATION INDICATES THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME CONNECTIVE ITTY IN THE EVENT THAT THERE WAS DEVELOPMENT TO THE. THAT AREA TO THE WEST. FORGET WHAT YOU HOW YOU SAID THAT TO THE WEST. SO LET ME GO BACK TO THE AERIAL PHOTO AND I REALLY, THAT DOESN'T EVEN ZOOMED OUT FAR ENOUGH. SO THIS THIS PROPERTY HERE TO THE WEST IS CURRENTLY VACANT. IT HAS FURNITURE, TEXT AND LANE. IF YOU GO JUST TO THE NORTH, A LITTLE FURTHER OFF SCREEN. THERE IS A ANOTHER PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. SO THE THOUGHT IS THAT BY HAVING THIS CONNECTION HERE THAT WOULD PROMOTE SOME CIRCULATION AND GIVE PEOPLE ALTERNATIVE ROUTES TO GET TO AND FROM OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD IF AND WHEN THERE IS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE. AND SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE COMMITTEE WAS WAS VERY DETERMINED TO GET THAT STUFF TO THE WEST BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE, SO THERE ABSOLUTELY IS A STUB. THAT THERE WILL BE A STUBBORN ONCE THIS THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETE. CORRECT THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WOULD YOU KNOW IF THERE WAS A SEVEN TO NOTHING VOTE AT THE AT THE COMMISSION THAT THAT SPEAKS VOLUMES FOR ME, ANYWAY. UM BUT I ALSO WANT TO ALSO LOOK AT ANYBODY THAT THAT PERHAPS HAS ISSUES AND THERE WAS ONE VOICE OF OPPOSITION. WHO'S REALLY SPOKE OUT AGAINST THREE STORY UNIT FOR THIS AREA. WHICH, OF COURSE WE WE'VE BEEN SOMEWHAT. FAIRLY CONCERNED ABOUT , YOU KNOW, BUT BUT BUT THAT TYPE OF THING THAT'S THE SIZE THERE. THERE IS A VERY, VERY BUSY AREA OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD. IT'S DEVELOPING HAVE A HEAVY DUTY. UM BUT I THINK THAT THIS THING IS STILL PRETTY COMPATIBLE FOR THE AREA AND THAT THE I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT THE VOICE OF OPPOSITION, BUT I THINK THIS THING IS A FAIRLY GOOD DEVELOPMENT THAT THAT DOES NOT MEET THAT WOULD I WOULD NOT WANT TO BE VOTING VOTING AGAINST THIS. SO I WILL SUPPORT THIS. AND I WOULD ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CAN I ASK YOU A QUICK QUESTION, COUNSELOR? MINGO WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN THE STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT? AT MADAME CHAIR. ABSOLUTELY YOU ARE TO BE APPLAUDED FOR THAT. EACH AND EVERY TIME THAT YOU REMIND US. THANK YOU. I DON'T LIKE TO ASSUME THAT SOMEBODY WANTS IT ON THERE. JUST BECAUSE I SAY THERE MIGHT BE AN ISSUE. COULD YOU READ THAT? IF YOU NEED TO READ THAT INTO THE RECORD, OR DO YOU WANT ME TO READ IT, THEN? I'D BE HAPPY TO ANY SIGNIFICANT INCREASES TO THE PRO STRUCTURES INCREASES THE BUILDING HEIGHT NUMBER OF UNITS, NUMBER BUILDINGS, ANY INCREASE IN DENSITY ON THE PROPERTY, AND IT CHANGES IN USE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR SUBCOMMITTEE THEREOF. AND OR ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE BINDING ELEMENTS OTHER THAN I EDITION OF NEW BINDING ELEMENTS TO I CHANGES THE MINING ELEMENTS THAT MERELY UPDATE THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE OR THREE. I UPDATING A PREVIOUS VERSION OF THIS BINDING ELEMENT TO REFLECT THE CURRENT LANGUAGE SHALL BE REVIEWED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WITH FINAL ACTION TO BE DETERMINED BY METRO COUNCIL. I MOVE THAT AMENDMENT SECOND. PROPERLY MOVED BY MYSELF AND SECOND BY COUNCILMAN ENGEL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDED SHEET BINDING THEM AT NUMBER EIGHT SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE, I POSED BY LIXIN HEARING NONE. THE MOTION PASSES ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. YES, COUNCILMAN BAKER. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR . I DO HAVE TWO QUESTIONS, AND I WOULD DEFER TO, UH, COUNCILOR ENGEL BECAUSE HE KNOWS HIS DISTRICT BETTER THAN I DO. BUT THERE WERE THERE WERE TWO IN OPPOSITION THAT HAD. CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE PARKING CONCERNS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT? THEY HAD ISSUES WITH THAT. AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION. UM THERE WAS A GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE OUT THAT IS GOING TO BE. I GUESS HE IS LOSING THE ONE UNIT. AND IT SAID THAT COMMISSIONER PHOENIX AND OTHER UNIT WILL BE OFFERED A UNIT BUT THEN TRANS CITY IT'S [00:30:03] NOT HEARD BACK FROM THE TENANT. SO JUST DIFFERENT. SORRY. I'M SORRY, CAME UP WITH THE WRONG WAY. WHAT DID I TAKE THAT BACK? I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. I DON'T SEE. HOW DO YOU, UM. I HAD A DIFFERENT SCRIPT COLOR. DIFFERENT SCREENING POPPED UP. WITH THE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL SPEAKERS. YEAH SO I WAS CONFUSED. I DON'T KNOW. I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT SCREEN BEFORE. DOES HE WANNA? WE'VE ALSO BEEN JOINED THAT COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL. LET THE RECORD REFLECT SHE'S HERE. SO UM ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? TRY IT. THANK YOU. SAYING THAT I THINK WE'RE READY TO VOTE. CHERYL. COMMITTEE MEMORY. NO, HOWEVER, HI. SO. SHE SAID. YES. IS CLOSED. THERE ARE EIGHT YES, VOTES IN THIS WILL GO TO A BUSINESS THAT OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE. WHICH IS AN ARTIST RELATED TO ZONING OF PROPERTIES, LOCATED AT 7009, SOUTHWESTERN TRAIL, AND 79, 09 AND 7913 ARE LIKE GLASS OR LANE CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 8.37 ACRES AND BEING IN LOVE METRO CASE NUMBER 23 ZONES 0063. MOTION. PROBABLY MOVED IN SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BAKER AND COUNCILWOMAN REALLY WE'RE READY FOR DISCUSSION COMMISSION. DOCKET NUMBER 23 ZONE 63 FOR WATER. SOME GARDENS. THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS 7009 SOUTH WATERS AND TRAIL. THIS IS LOCATED METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT 23. THIS IS AN OUTLINE OF THE PROPERTIES IN QUESTION HERE NEAR THE INTERSECTION, SOUTH WATERSON TRAIL AND GLACIER LANE. UH YOU CAN SEE THAT THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VACANT. THERE ARE PROPOSING A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE SIDE. THIS IS A ZONING MAP OF THE AREA. THE PARCELS CURRENTLY ZONED R FIVE, LOCATED IN NEIGHBORHOOD FORM DISTRICT. THEY ARE PROPOSING A CHANGE TO OUR FIVE A. AND THEN THE FORM DISAGREED. REMAIN THE SAME. YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S SOME ARE FIVE TO THE TO THE EAST , AND THEN YOU HAVE OUR FOUR TO THE NORTH AND THE WEST AND THEN MAKE SOME COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH. SO THE REQUEST BEFORE WE USE A CHANGE FROM R FIVE TO R FIVE, A THEY ARE PROPOSING 85 TOWNHOUSE STYLE UNITS. THIS IS A VACANT SITE THAT'S LOCATED IN THE HIGH VIEW AREA. THE SITE WAS PREVIOUSLY REZONED FROM OUR FOUR TO OUR FIVE FOR A, UH, LIKE A MAJOR SUBDIVISION THAT WAS APPROVED UNDER 14 ZONE, 1040. THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THE APPLICANT HAS BROUGHT FORTH FOR APPROVAL. WITH THIS REQUEST OR CHANGING ZONING. YOU CAN SEE THE THERE'S ONE ACCESS FROM SOUTH PARTISAN TRAIL THAT COMES IN AND THEN, UH, YOU KNOW THE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS THERE. THIS IS THE 2014 DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO THE STREET KIND OF REMAINS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS APPROVED BEFORE. AT THAT TIME, IT WAS PROPOSED FOR 37 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS. THESE ARE THE RENDERINGS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT DURING THEIR TESTIMONY AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS SO YOU CAN GET AN IDEA FOR THE DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE, LOOKING FROM SOUTH WATERSON TRAIL INTO THE SITE AGAINST FAIRLY VACANT THESE ARE SOME OF THE ADJACENT SITES ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF SOUTH WATERSON TRAIL. THIS IS THE CHURCH, WHICH I BELIEVE THEY WERE PART OF THE APPLICATION PARTY BEFORE AND SO THEY. THIS IS LOCATED IMMEDIATELY TO THE TO THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE. THIS IS ANOTHER ADJACENT SITE. SO THE APPLICANT CONDUCTED THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ON MARCH 14TH 2023 DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING WAS ON JULY 27TH 2023 AND THE LANGUAGE PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 5TH. THE MOTION WAS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CHANGING ZONING FROM OUR FATHER, OUR FIVE A, AND THAT PASSED BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 0. THAT'S ALL I HAVE IS HEAVY QUESTIONS FOR ME. COUNCILMAN REED IS CUTE IN COUNCILMAN REED. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, BRIAN COMEDY OF THESE UNITS, IF ANY ARE [00:35:04] AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS THEY DID NOT SPECIFIED WHETHER YOU KNOW WHAT THE PRICE RANGE WOULD BE ON THIS AND WHETHER OR NOT ANY AFFORDABLE UNITS WOULD BE INCLUDED. THANK YOU. THIS IS IN COUNCILMAN HUDSON'S DISTRICT, AND I HAD HEARD BACK FROM HIM VIA EMAIL THAT HE IS SUPPORTIVE OF. THIS HAS NO CONCERNS THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO ADD, UM THE STANDARD BINDING ELEMENTS. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S GOING TO BE BINDING ELEMENT NUMBER SIX. IS THAT CORRECT? SO I'LL TRY THIS. IF YOU DON'T MIND, NOT AT ALL. ANY SIGNIFICANT INCREASES TO THE PRO STRUCTURES. EG INCREASES IN BUILDING HEIGHT NUMBER OF UNITS, NUMBER BUILDINGS, ANY INCREASE IN DENSITY ON THE PROPERTY, AND IT CHANGED IN USE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR SUBCOMMITTEE THEREOF, AND OR ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE BINDING ELEMENTS. OTHER THAN I EDITION OF NEW BINDING ELEMENTS TO I CHANGED THE MINING ELEMENTS THAT REALLY UPDATE THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE OR THREE. I UPDATING A PREVIOUS VERSION OF THIS BINDING ELEMENT TO REFLECT THE CURRENT LANGUAGE SHALL BE REVIEWED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE FINAL ACTION TO BE DETERMINED BY METRO COUNCIL. I MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. PROPERLY MOVING A SECOND BY MYSELF AND COUNCILWOMAN CHAPEL. UM ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. I WAS OPPOSED BY LIKE SAN HEARING NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS COLLEAGUES? SAY NONE WERE READY TO VOTE. COMMITTEE MEMBER ARENA. WEBER I THANK YOU. WITHOUT OBJECTION, VOTING IS CLOSING. THIS THIS WILL THERE. EIGHT? YES HOUSES EIGHT. YES VOTES, SO THIS WILL GO TO OLD BUSINESS AT OUR NEXT CANCEL MEETING. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR WITH AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE CHANGE OF THE TO THE CHANGE OF THE STREET NAME OF THE PORTION OF STEWART AVENUE NORTH OF FURY, WAY TO VIRGINIA AVENUE AND BEING IN LOCAL METRO CASE NUMBER 23 STREET NAMES 0001. MOTION READS. PROBABLY MADE BY COUNCILMAN BAKER SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CHAPEL. WE'RE READY FOR DISCUSSION PLANNING COMMISSION. DOCTOR NUMBER 23 STREET NAME ONE FOR THE STEWART AVENUE REZONING OR RENAMING. SORRY. SO THE. THE REQUEST IS FOR US STEWART AVENUE AT FURY WAY THIS IS LOCATED METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT 14. SO THIS IS A STREET NAME CHANGE FOR A PORTION OF STEWART AVENUE TO CHANGE THAT TO VIRGINIA AVENUE. IT'S A 60 FT STUB CONNECTING TO A PROPOSED EXTENSION OF VIRGINIA AVENUE WAS WAS PART OF A SUBDIVISION PLAN, WHICH I'LL SHOW YOU IN. JUST A SECOND IS A LOCAL LEVEL ROADWAY, AND THIS STREET NAME WAS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE I, UH, BINDING ELEMENT THAT WAS REQUIRED AS PART OF THE LAST APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THIS SITE, WHICH WAS 22 D V P. 36. SO THIS IS AN AERIAL PHOTO OF THE OF THE SITE THIS TRIANGULAR SHAPE HERE. THAT'S THE PIECE THAT IS, UM, PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT THAT IS GOING TO CONNECT VIRGINIA AVENUE, WHICH YOU SEE TO THE NORTH AND IN STEWART AVENUE, WHICH IS HERE ON THE SOUTH. AND SO, UM IN TERMS OF LIKE. RENAMING AND SUCH WHENEVER WE HAVE RENAMES LIKE THIS WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO DO IT IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IT FOR A STREET THAT CONTINUES. YOU PREFER TO DO THAT AT AN INTERSECTION, AND SO YOU HAVE A CLEAN INTERSECTION HERE WITH STEWART AVENUE AND FURY WAY AND THEN NEITHER OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE ON EITHER SIDE OF STEWART AVENUE HAVE STEWART AVENUE ADDRESSES SO IT DOES NOT IMPACT ANY OF THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS IN ANY WAY TO CHANGE THE NAME HERE. SO THIS IS THE PLAN FOR THE NAME CHANGE THAT JUST SHOWS THE AREA OF THE RIGHT OF WAY IN WHICH THE AFRICANS PROPOSING TO CHANGE THAT NAME. AND THEN THIS IS THE THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED. THAT WAS THAT IS PROPOSING TO CONNECT THOSE TWO AND AGAIN KIND OF CLEANING UP THE STREET NAMING SYSTEM HERE IN THAT AREA. UH, IF AND WHEN THIS IS DEVELOPED IN THOSE STREETS ARE CONNECTED. THIS IS A JUST A PHOTO OF THE STUB THERE. SO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE HEATHER MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 28TH 2023. THAT ITEM WAS PLACED ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONSENT AGENDA ON OCTOBER 5TH 2023 IN THE MOTION DIRECTLY APPROVAL. THE STREET NAME CHANGE PASSED BY VOTERS 7 TO 0. THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME. THANK YOU. BRIAN COUNT, OKAY? THIS IS IN COUNSELING AND CINDY FOWLER'S DISTRICT AND SHE SENT ME A TEXT AND SAID THAT SHE IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE NAME CHANGE. UM, DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. YES, COUNCILMAN CHAPEL. I'M FINE WITH THE NAME CHANGE. I'M JUST TRYING TO [00:40:08] UNDERSTAND. WHY WOULD IT BE NAMED VIRGINIA VERSUS STEWART? UM BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO GO FROM VIRGINIA TO STEWART RIGHT POINT. RIGHT YEAH. WHY IS THIS ADVANTAGEOUS? UH BECAUSE YOU HAVE A YOU HAVE, UH, THAT HAVE A CLEAN ENDING POINT WITH THE INTERSECTION WITH FURY WAY AND I THINK IF YOU GO FURTHER NORTH OF VIRGINIA, WHICH I DIDN'T GET IN THE PHOTO, THERE ARE SOME PROPERTIES THAT ARE ADDRESS ON VIRGINIA. AND SO IF YOU CHANGE THAT SIDE, IT WOULD IT WOULD IMPACT THE OWNERS. AND IF YOU IF I KNOW, WE GET LOTS OF COMMENTS WHENEVER WE ARE IMPACTING PEOPLE'S ADDRESSES LIKE THAT, BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO MAKE CHANGES TO LIKE. MORTGAGE POLICIES AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. AND SO THIS IS THE KIND OF THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE IN TERMS OF THE WAY IT AFFECTS THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. THANK YOU. CAPTAIN ARTHUR. THANK YOU, ADAM. VERIFY ON A MAP. I GREW UP IN THE PARKLAND NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH VIRGINIA AVENUE. AND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. ARE THERE DIFFERENCES? I'M JUST CURIOUS HOW THAT WORKS WHEN WE HAVE STREETS WITH THE SAME NAME. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A COUPLE AROUND THE COMMUNITY. WHERE YEAH, YOU HAVE LIKE YOU HAVE LIKE I KNOW THERE'S A COUPLE OF LYNDON LANES OUT IN THE EAST END. AND SO YOU HAVE DIFFERENT AREAS. I KNOW FROM AN EMERGENCY STANDPOINT, THAT THAT THEY JUST TRIED TO DO A REALLY GOOD JOB OF KEEPING TRACK OF THE HOUSE NUMBERS AND SUCH SO THAT WHATEVER THEY DO GET EMERGENCY CALLS THEY CAN DISPATCH. THE PROPER PEOPLE TO THE PROPER ADDRESS. AND SO, UH, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW AS FAR AS LIKE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO VIRGINIA AVENUES, BUT IT DOES EXIST HERE, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO RUN ACROSS FROM TIME TO TIME. THANK YOU, LAMBERT. AND IN MY DISTRICT, BUT IT HAS TWO DISTINCT IT'S DIVIDED WITH A GUARDRAIL THAT THEY USED TO DO BACK IN THE SIXTIES. AND THEN THERE'S A LAMBERT OUT IN HALF OFF OF THIRD STREET ROAD. SO SOMETIMES I GET CONFUSED DOES GET CONFUSING LIKE YOU'RE SAYING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. SEEN NONE WERE READY TO VOTE. COMMITTEE MEMORY. NO WEBER. I THANK YOU. WITHOUT OBJECTION. VOTING IS CLOSING. THERE ARE EIGHT YES VOTES, AND THIS WILL GO TO OH BUSINESS THAT OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING OH, YES, IT CAN. IT'LL GO TO CONSENT. THANK YOU. I GET EVERYTHING I CAN SEND AS WE CAN. I DON'T REMEMBER FIVE AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE REVISED DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6001 OUTER LOOP CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 15.16 ACRES AND BEING A LEVEL METRO CASE NUMBER 23 D D P. 0078. PROPERLY MOVING A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BAKER AND SECOND BY COUNCILMAN RUI. WE'RE READY FOR DISCUSSION COMMISSION DOCTOR NUMBER 23 DDP 78 FOR HOME FLATS AND OUTER LOOP. THE PROPERTIES LOCATED 6001 OUTER LOOP LOCATED METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT, 20 FOR THE PROPERTIES CURRENTLY VACANT, THEY'RE PROPOSING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE. THE ZONING IS R SIX. AND THIS IS NOT A ZONING CHANGE. THIS IS JUST A DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. BUT THIS IS ONE WHERE THERE WAS THE BINDING ELEMENT TO BRING IT BACK TO METRO COUNCIL. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. SO THE REQUEST BEFORE USED TO REVISE THE DETAILED DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SITE. THE EVIDENCE PROPOSING 252 MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON APPROXIMATELY 15 ACRES, THE MIX OF TWO AND FOUR STORY BUILDINGS, UH AND, UM , THE ORIGINAL DECIDED THE ORIGINAL REZONED UNDER 20 ZONE. 120 HAD THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS AND THEY AS YOU'LL SEE ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS HERE IN JUST A MINUTE. THEY THIS NEW THE NEW APPLICANT THEY HAVE, JUST LIKE A DIFFERENT STYLE OF BUILDING THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. SO THAT THE ONES ON HERE THE TWO AND FOUR STORIES, WHEREAS THE OLD ONE WAS JUST THREE STORIES ACROSS THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT SITE. SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN HERE. ADDED LOOPS LOCATED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PHOTO, YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS THAT THEY HAVE HERE ON THE SITE THE THERE ARE TWO STORY BUILDINGS THAT ARE FRONTING ON OUTER LOOP AND THEN THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE TOWARDS THE INTERIOR OF THE SIDE OR FOUR STORIES. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE JUST THE WAY THAT THE PARKING CONFIGURATION IS SUCH EXISTS ON THE SITE. THIS IS THE OLD PLAN. THAT WAS PROPOSED UNDER THE ORIGINAL REZONING REQUEST HAD MORE BUILDINGS AND AGAIN THEY WERE PROPOSING THREE STORY BUILDINGS WITH THOSE BUT THE YOU KNOW THE APPLICANT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO DO IS TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT THEY WERE DISTURBING ON THE SITE, AND SO THEY FEEL THAT THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO ACHIEVE THAT WITH THE PLANTS THAT THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING. SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE PROPOSED [00:45:05] ELEVATIONS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT AT THE AT THE HEARING. THIS IS A LOOK INTO THE SUBJECT SITE. HERE'S ANOTHER ONE. AND THEN THE PLAYING COMMISSION CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER ON OCTOBER 5TH 2023, THERE WAS A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REVISED DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT PASSED BY VOTE OF SIX TO 02 WITH ONE ABSTENTION. THAT'S ALL THAT HAPPENED UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME. UM, THIS IS IN MY DISTRICT AND THIS IS THE SIDE OF THE OLD HIGHLIGHT. SWIM CLUB. IF YOU REMEMBER THAT IT'S ALSO THE HAVE YOU, EVERYBODY THAT THE HAVING. YOU DID HAVE A HIGH VIEW FROM THAT POINT USED TO BE ABLE TO GO TO THE PROPERTY AND THE SWIMMING POOL USED TO HAVE THINGS WHERE YOU COULD WATCH THE FIREWORKS FROM DOWNTOWN BECAUSE YOU CAN LITERALLY ON A NICE THIRD DAY. SEE ALL THE WAY INTO DOWNTOWN FROM THIS AREA. UM DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? BECAUSE I'M GOING TO ASK FOR A MOTION TO TABLE IT BECAUSE THERE SINCE IT IS FOUR STORY, UM THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT I WANT TO CHECK OUT AND MAKE SURE THAT UM PUBLIC SAFETY IS ALWAYS AN ISSUE WITH ME AND AS IT IS WITH THE REST OF US, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S COVERED LIKE SINCE IT IS FOUR STORIES SECOND. PROPERLY MOVED IN SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF TABLE AND SIGNIFY BY SAYING, AYE. WAS OPPOSED BY LIKE SIGN SEEN ON THE MOTION CARRIES, SO THIS SHALL BE TABLED UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX. WHICH IS AN ORGANIST, CREATING A NEW CHAPTER OF THE LOUISVILLE JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES. L M C O PROTECTING COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL METRO FROM DISPLACEMENT TO BE KNOWN AS THE ANTI DISPLACEMENT LAW AND AMENDING LMC 0 92.15. THIS WAS REINTRODUCED SO THE MOTION WILL BE TO APPROVE IT. AS WE AS WE NORMALLY DO, IT WASN'T TABLES. SOME MOTION. PROPERLY MOVED AND SECOND AND WE' READY FOR DISCUSON. CNCILN COY LESLATNS IN THE SYSTEM. AS A REMINDER JUST AS A SUMMARY. ONCE WE PASS THIS, WE'RE ASKING THE ADMINISTRATION TO CONTRACT WITH AN ACADEMIC INSTITUTION. TO CREATE A DISPLACEMENT ASSESSMENT. TO USE ONE DEVELOPMENTS ARE USING METRO RESOURCES. OVER THE COURSE OF THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS. WE'VE ALSO MADE SOME CHANGES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE APPROVING AND REVIEWING THAT DISPLACEMENT ASSESSMENT BEFORE IT ACTUALLY GETS USED. WE'RE ALSO CREATING A NEW COMMISSION TO HELP REVIEW THAT ASSESSMENT AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AS NEEDED TO US. MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOUSEHOLDS AND BUSINESSES, VICTIM TO DISCRIMINATION. AS WELL AS WORK WITH THE OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND THE LOUISVILLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND TO UPDATE THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT EVERY FIVE YEARS. I'VE BEEN TALKING WITH PRESIDENT WINKLER ABOUT SOME VERY MINOR CHANGES THAT WE FEEL COMFORTABLE MAKING BEFORE THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. BUT MY FELLOW CORRESPONSALES MIGHT HAVE SOME REMARKS TO MAKE THEM MORE OPEN FOR QUESTIONS. LABEL MY NAME IN THE SYSTEM. OKAY, COUNSELOR, COUNCILMAN, HER SHOT. GO AHEAD. YEAH. I JUST REALLY WANT TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATE ALL THE FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE WHO COME IN EVERY SINGLE TIME THAT THIS ORDINANCE HAS BEEN INTRODUCING YOU HAVE COME IN. WE GATHER WEEK AFTER WEEK MONTH AFTER MONTH AND YEAH, YEAH. YOU NEVER GET TIRED, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I REALLY HOPE THAT WE REALLY, UH, SHOW YOU THAT APPRECIATION THAT YOU DESERVE THE HARD WORK YOU PUT IN. AND FOR MY COLLEAGUE CORY ARTHUR, MAN. I MEAN, HE'S A LOCAL HERO, MAN, AND THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT SO MANY CITIES, YOU KNOW, HAVEN'T BEEN TRYING TO DO, BUT THERE ARE SOME CITIES THAT ARE TRYING TO DO IT AND THEY'VE HAD SOME SUCCESS RIGHT BEFORE HIM TO INTRODUCE THIS TO US AND BE BOLD ABOUT IT TO KEEP PUSHING IT THROUGH AND KEEP URGING US. AND I WAS JUST GLAD THAT HE STARTED THE PROCESS AND I WAS ABLE TO BE RECRUITED BY HIM BECAUSE I HAVE SALUTE. WE BELIEVE IN THIS CAUSE I BELIEVE IN Y'ALL. I BELIEVE IN THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE TO DECIDE THEIR OWN FUTURE, HOW OUR COMMUNITIES WILL BE USED WHAT MONEY IS COMING IN AND HOW IT IS USED TO BE TO THIS PLACE ON PEOPLE. LOCAL CONTROL IS THE UTMOST, YOU KNOW, UTMOST FORM OF DEMOCRACY. AND I REALLY APPLAUD YOU ALL. AND I JUST ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE. YES, ON THIS. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. COUNCILMAN, BRING A WEBER GO [00:50:07] AHEAD. I JUST WANT TO KILL MY THANKS FOR THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE REALLY BROUGHT THEIR VOICES TO BEAR HERE, AND I REALLY WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR BEING VERY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT THIS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK IS THE MOST POWERFUL IS THAT IT REALLY INCLUDES ELEMENTS OF COMMUNITY VOICE, BUT ALSO HIS DATA SO THAT WE'RE NOT OPERATING FROM THIS SORT OF MYTHOLOGY OF EVERY DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS, AS RESIDENTIAL IMPLICATIONS IS GOING TO DISPLACE PEOPLE DIDN'T REALLY KNOW. IS THIS TRUE? AND IF SO, THEN WE GET TO PUT IN PLACE THE THINGS THAT PROTECT THE THINGS THAT WE CARE ABOUT, AND THE PEOPLE IN COMMUNITIES CARRIED OUT RATHER THAN OPERATING IN A VACUUM OF YEAH, SPECULATION. I REALLY I LOVE THE WAY THAT THIS IS DATA DRIVEN. I LOVE THE PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN DONE, WHICH HAS BEEN ENGAGING COMMUNITY MEMBERS BUT ALSO THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO INVEST IN HIS COMMUNITY. SO THANK YOU LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONTINUING DISCUSSIONS. THE SAME ANYMORE. CANCEL ONE A WEEK. YES THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. JAH KOREA, ARTHUR AND COMMUNITY WHO HAS HELPED KNOW THIS HAS BEEN MONTHS, POSSIBLY YEARS IN THE MAKING, AND IT'S A VERY COMPLEX ORDINANCE. AND I APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN AND THE EFFORTS TO INCLUDE ALL STAKEHOLDERS IN THERE AND TO MAKE THIS A TRANSPARENT PROCESS THAT IS EASILY CORRECTED ALONG THE LINES AS WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT ACTUALLY WORK IN THE REAL WORLD IS SO I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO VOTING FOR THIS AND MOVING THIS ONTO THE FULL COUNCIL. ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE GO ON TO QUESTIONS. I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU, COUNCILMAN COREY SO I SAID THAT THOSE CHANGES WERE VERY SMALL. I CAN DETAIL THOSE. AND IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE CHANGES OR FOR THE ORDINANCE IN GENERAL, WE CAN DISCUSS IT. BUT THERE ARE REALLY THREE CHANGES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. ONE CHANGES INSTEAD OF SOMEONE HAVING TO LIVE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD TO SERVE ON THE BOARD FOR 10 YEARS CONSECUTIVELY . WE'RE LOOKING AT 10 YEARS COLLECTIVELY FROM THESE DISPLACEMENT RISK AREAS THAT WAY WE'RE MAKING SURE PEOPLE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN IMPACTED BY GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT. STILL HAVE A VOICE. WE'RE NOT JUST CENTERING HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE STABLE IN THEIR RESIDENCY. WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT MAKING SURE INSTEAD OF GENERICALLY, SAYING BOARD MEMBERS CAN'T BE UM , TIED TO THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. THAT WERE VERY SPECIFIC IN SAYING WE DON'T WANT THEM TO BE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS BECAUSE BEING TIED TO THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY COMEDIAN WORK AT LOWE'S, AND WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. AND THEN THE LAST CHANGE IS ALIGNING THE LANGUAGE AROUND HOW BOARD MEMBERS ARE REMOVED, IT INCORRECTLY, SAYS INEFFICIENCY WHEN IT SHOULD SAY IN CAPACITY SIMILAR TO HOW WE JUST REMOVE SOMEONE FROM THE CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T SHOWING UP TO MEETINGS FOR HOWEVER MANY MONTHS SO THAT INADVERTENTLY HAVE THE WRONG WORD AND IT FROM THE STATE STATUTE, SO THAT'S REALLY JUST A TECHNICAL CHANGE. BUT THOSE ARE THE CHANGES AND AGAIN WE'RE OPEN FOR QUESTIONS. IF I MIGHT ADD JUST A BRIEF NOTE. IN CASE YOU ARE LOOKING FOR IT THE 10 COLLECTIVE YEARS INTO PLACE AND DISPLACEMENT AREA ISN'T 1 69.05 SUB SEVEN? THE. EMPLOYMENT AS A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER. CHANGE IS IN 1 69.0578 IN THE INCAPACITY FOR INEFFICIENCY IS 1 69.05 SUB 16. SO THEY'RE ALL IN 1, 69.0578 AND 16, RESPECTIVELY. COUNCIL MEMBER BACK, SEAN. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU, COREY. FOR CLEANING THIS VERSION UP. UM SO I HAVE A LIST OF QUESTIONS I STARTED TO READ INTO THIS. IT'S 11 PAGES, WHICH IS BETTER THAN 19. BUT I CAN POINT ON PAGE THREE, RIGHT? UM BUT OBVIOUSLY VERY THOUGHT OUT AND WELL, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION. FIRST QUESTION COMES IN MY MIND IS IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT YOU LIST DO WE KNOW THE NUMBER OF RENTERS VERSUS HOMEOWNERS THAT AREN'T THAT ACTUALLY LIVED THERE VERSUS HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE RENTING. TO THE RENTERS ESSENTIALLY LIKE HOW MANY PEOPLE . ON THE HOME THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS VERSUS THE RENTERS ARE LIVING IN NEIGHBORHOODS. SO WE DO HAVE A LOT OF DATA AROUND RENTERS AND OWNERS AND THE ONE THAT WE USE, THE MOST OFTEN IS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD DATA PROFILES. AND THOSE SHOW PERCENTAGE OF RENTERS PERCENTAGE OF OWNERS. WE ALSO HAVE PERCENTAGE OF RENTERS AND PERCENTAGE OF OWNERS FOR DISPLACEMENT, RISK AREAS AND HOUSING MARKET AREAS AT LARGE, SO YES, WE DO HAVE THAT DATA. IT'S UPDATED AS FREQUENTLY AS [00:55:03] POSSIBLE THROUGH THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT EVERY FIVE YEARS. I STOPPED QUICK COUNSELING. BUT, SEAN, THANK YOU FOR THAT. ANSWER. UM I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. SORRY. I'M JUST AS THINGS COME FROM ONE SECOND COUNCILMAN REED YOUR NEXT BUT YOU FOR SOME REASON YOU WERE ASSIGNED TO A DIFFERENT PIECE OF LEGISLATION. YOU WEREN'T SHOWING UP IN THE QUEUE. SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. GO AHEAD COUNSELING THAT SHOW. WHAT WILL THE DIVERSITY OF THE COMMISSIONER BOARD ENTAIL? WHAT ARE YOU KNOW? WHAT'S THE DIVERSITY REQUIREMENTS TO BE ON THIS COMMISSION? UM, AND MAYBE THIS IS A TWO PART QUESTION. BUT UM, WHERE THE COMMISSION BE COMPRISED OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THOSE PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOODS OR AS ONE COMMISSION AS A WHOLE. TO ASSESS ALL THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS. SO THAT DIVERSITY IS STANDARD BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE FOR OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OR WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE FURTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. RACIALLY IN TERMS OF GENDER IN TERMS OF POLITICAL IDEOLOGY AND PARTY REGISTRATION. WHAT WE GET MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT IS IF YOU LIVE IN THOSE DISPLACEMENT RISK AREAS, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP DISPLACEMENT RISK AREAS ARE REALLY ALL OVER THE CITY IN THE EASTERN AND THE WESTERN AND THE SOUTH AND IN THE CENTRAL AREA OF TOWN. SO THE SPECIFICITY IS MAKING SURE THAT WE CENTER PEOPLE WHO ARE MOST IMPACTED BY DISPLACEMENT, BUT WE DO HAVE DIVERSITY IN OTHER WAYS AGAIN, RACIALLY MAKING SURE THAT THE POLITICAL PARTIES ARE REPRESENTED THAT REPRESENTED ACROSS TOWN AS WELL. THANK YOU. I'M SURE I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS. I'LL JUST I'LL LET COUNCILMAN REED GO. COUNCILMAN REED. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. UM THIS IS FOR COUNCILMAN ARTHUR. UM REGARDING THE CONDITION AND YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY REVIEWED THIS BEING REDUNDANT. PLEASE BEAR WITH ME. BUT HOW MANY PEOPLE ON THE COMMISSION? AND HOW LONG ARE THERE TURNS AND WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF APPOINTMENT? THAT WILL BE SO COMMISSION MEMBERS GO THROUGH THE REGULAR APPOINTMENT PROCESS, WHICH WILL COME TO THE GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. WHAT IS THAT PROCESS? IT IS A REGULAR PROCESS FOR OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. IT'S REALLY THE EXACT SAME. AS FAR AS HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ON IT. THERE ARE NINE VOTING MEMBERS. AND THEN THERE ARE THREE NONVOTING MEMBERS OR EX OFFICIAL MEMBERS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. AND THOSE THREE MEMBERS COME FROM THE OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. THE HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION AND THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND HOW LONG ARE THE TERMS? STAND BY. LET ME CHECK THE PAGE NUMBER. COUNCILMAN READ IT IF YOU GO TO PAGE NINE, DETAILS OUT THE TERM LIMITS. NUMBER NINE. THE APPOINTMENT TERM OF EACH COMMISSION MEMBER SHALL BE THREE YEARS. EXCEPT FOR THE INITIAL APPOINTMENT TERMS, WHICH WILL BE STAGGERED AS FOLLOWS THREE YEARS OF POINTED TO ONE YEAR TERMS, THREE MEMBERS APPOINTED TO TWO YEAR TERMS AND THREE MEMBERS APPOINTED 23 YEAR TERMS. OKAY NIGHT. MY PDM DID NOT HAVE THAT HYPERLINK SO APPRECIATED. FOR DOING THAT WITH ME. UM THAT'S ALL I AM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. UM. THE THREE ITEMS THAT THAT COUNCILMAN ARTHUR SPOKE OF THE NEED TO BE VOTED ON AS AMENDMENTS TO THE NEW NEW SECTIONS, SO WE NEED A MOTION IN THE SECOND MOTION. PROBABLY YOU CAN'T SECOND. NO, YOU HAVE TO BE PROBABLY MOVED BY COUNCILOR BAKER SECOND BY COUNCILMAN RENO WEBER. YOU NEED DISCUSSION ON THOSE THREE, SAYING THAT ALTHOUGH SOME PAPERS OF THE AMENDMENTS SIGNIFIED CHINA. HI, MIKE SON. HEARING THAT MOTION PASSES. THAT'S JUST THAT'S JUST [01:00:12] ON THE AMENDMENTS. THAT'S JUST ON THE AMENDMENTS. YEAH. COUNCILMAN ARTHUR GO AHEAD. WE HAVE AN INQUIRY TO CHANGE THAT. THAT LIVING CONDITIONS FROM 10 YEARS TO SEVEN YEARS. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE COLLECTIVE YEARS FROM YES, I CAN'T MAKE THAT MOTION. BUT MAYBE IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT MOTION I MEAN, YEAH. IF YOU WANT. DID YOU WANT TO DISCUSS? OKAY SECOND, OKAY, PROPERLY MAKING SECOND. WE'RE READY FOR DISCUSSION. COUNCILMAN BAKER. I JUST HAD A QUESTION ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SEVEN AND 10 YEARS. SO THE 10 YEARS WAS ORIGINALLY INTRODUCED. THINKING ABOUT THE CENSUS HAS TO BE DONE EVERY 10 YEARS THINKING ABOUT HOW WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN A LONG TERM RESIDENT AS WELL. THE REASON THAT WE'RE GOING FROM CONSECUTIVE YEARS TOOK COLLECTIVE YEARS IS BECAUSE IF YOU'RE BEING FACED WITH DISPLACEMENT, YOU CAN'T AFFORD YOUR HOUSING. YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE LIVING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR LONG. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE MORE TRANSIENT SEE SO COLLECTIVELY MAKES SENSE. BUT THE INQUIRY AS FAR AS FROM 10 YEARS TO SEVEN YEARS, WAS ACTUALLY IN DISCUSSION, GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH COMMITTEE MEMBER CHAPEL SO YOU MIGHT HAVE A COMMENT ABOUT WHY YOU WANTED TO DECREASE IN SURE, I THINK IT'S HEALTHY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION. I'M FINE WITH 10 YEARS AS THE THERE'S GOOD REASON BEHIND THAT, UM, I JUST DON'T WANT ANYONE'S VOICE TO BE LEFT OUT OF THIS, UM AND TO BE LESS PROHIBITIVE TO BE SERVING ON THIS COUNCIL, SO IF I'M NOT HELL BENT ON IT, SO I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT SOMEONE WHO MIGHT BE A GOOD ADVOCATE TO BE ON THIS BOARD. TO NOT HAVE A CHANCE BECAUSE THEY MIGHT FALL JUST A LITTLE SHORT BECAUSE YOU CAN STILL HAVE STEAK AND IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT BEING THERE FOR A DECADE, BUT IF EVERYONE FEELS COMFORTABLE, ATTEND, THEN YOU KNOW. WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THIS CHANGE. ARE YOU GOING TO VOTE? YES IF WE MAKE IT SEVEN YEARS? YEAH YES, I WILL. I WILL. I WILL, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IT DESERVES. WE'LL RUN THROUGH THE MIDDLE ON THE DIFFERENCE OF THREE YEARS. I JUST HOPE THAT WE'RE GETTING SOME REALLY FRUITFUL PEOPLE FROM THIS, UH, ON THIS REVIEW COMMISSION, AND I'M SURE THAT WE DO BUT ALSO AS A GEO A MEMBER. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S TOP OF MIND FOR ME. OKAY? COUNCILMAN ARTHUR AND I UNDERSTAND. ALSO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IF SOMEBODY'S MAYBE LIVING IN A NON DISPLACEMENT RISK AREA AND THEY MOVE INTO ONE OR VICE VERSA. THEY LIVE IN ONE AND THEN THEY LIVE ELSEWHERE. I THINK IT WOULD MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE FOR FOLKS. SEVEN YEARS. I'M OKAY WITH IT. AND I LIKE THAT SONG. YEAH. I'M MOTIONING. WE ALREADY DID THAT. IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION? WE JUST NEED TO VOTE ON ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? I'M LOOKING FOR UP AND UP A TV LAND. NOBODY, OKAY? ALL THOSE FAVORITE SIGNIFY. I'M JUST DOING THIS AMENDMENT TO SEVEN YEARS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. I LIKE SIGN HEARING NONE. THE MOTION PASSES. OKAY? I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE GOING AHEAD AND VOTING THIS OUT OF COMMITTEE AND I JUST WANT TO REMIND FOLKS THAT BEFORE YOU VOTE YES. THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT THE EVALUATION AND THE DISPLACEMENT ASSESSMENT COME FROM PLAYING 2040. YES, THEY COME FROM MY HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THEY COME FROM VERY REAL STRUGGLES THAT PEOPLE ARE FACING IN THIS CITY EVERY SINGLE DAY. AND I WANT TO JUST COMMEND THIS COMMITTEE AND THE METRO COUNCIL AT LARGE WHEN WE PASSED THIS TO SAY THAT WE'RE DOING SOMETHING BRAND NEW. THAT'S LARGELY NEVER BEEN DONE IN THE SOUTH AND MAYBE EVEN IN THE COUNTRY. AND AS WE WORK THROUGH THIS PROCESS, PLEASE WORK WITH US IN GOOD FAITH TO DO IT RIGHT AND TO PROTECT THE MOST MARGINALIZED LOUISVILLE LIENS. SO THANK YOU TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. THANK YOU TO THIS COMMITTEE. THANK YOU, CHAIR AND [01:05:03] MOST IMPORTANTLY, THANK YOU TO THE PEOPLE. WHO HELPED MAKE THIS POLICY WHAT IT IS AND HAVE BEEN SHOWING UP. WEEK AFTER WEEK MONTH AFTER MONTH FIGHTING WITH US I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE HAS QUESTIONS. I JUST HAD A QUESTION ON THE EMAIL THAT YOU SENT ME. UM ARE YOU IN PRESIDENT. WE'RE STILL HAVING THIS DISCUSSION OR DIALOGUE ABOUT THE AUTOMATIC IMAGE INELIGIBILITY QUESTION. NO BECAUSE HE'S SAYING HE DOESN'T SUPPORT AUTOMATIC AND ELIGIBILITY. WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE THAT BASED ON THIS LEGISLATION, BUT WE DO HAVE IT IN PRACTICE OUTSIDE OF THIS LEGISLATION, AND HOPEFULLY THIS HELPS GIVES US MORE TRANSPARENCY . SO RIGHT NOW THE MAYOR'S ADMINISTRATION, THEY DON'T ALWAYS BRING EVERY TAX INCREMENT FINANCING INQUIRY TO THE METRO COUNCIL. THEY DON'T BRING EVERY INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND INQUIRY TO THE COUNCIL. THEY DON'T BRING EVERYTHING TO THE COUNCIL. SOME THINGS ARE ALREADY INELIGIBLE WITHOUT US EVEN KNOWING ABOUT IT . BUT WHEN WE PASSED, THIS LEGISLATION WILL HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF OKAY. WHAT COMES TO THE COUNCIL VERSUS WHAT DOESN'T COME TO THE COUNCIL SO IT ACTUALLY MAKES THE PROCESS EVEN MORE TRANSPARENT? JUST SO WE KNOW WHAT'S WHAT AND WHO'S WHO. AND WHERE IS WHERE IS THERE ANY OTHER? QUESTIONS IN MY IN THE KEY. FOR SOME REASON, IT WASN'T REGISTERED EVERYBODY IN THE QUEUE THE WANTED TO SPEAK TO ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. NOT AT THE MOMENT. WHAT I'M THINKING IS WE'RE GETTING READY TO VOTES. WHY I'M ASKING. GOOD, GOOD, OKAY. IT. IT JUST FOR ANYONE WHO'S A LITTLE BIT HESITANT. THIS ISN'T THE LAST DISCUSSION WILL HAVE BECAUSE AGAIN, WE HAVE TO REVIEW AND LOOK AT THE DISPLACEMENT ASSESSMENT AND THE RESULTS MATRIX, SO WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK. IN A FEW MONTHS TALKING ABOUT THIS AGAIN, AND I'M SURE THAT CONVERSATION WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENSE BECAUSE ONCE WE PASSED THAT ASSESSMENT, THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT I GET USED IN PRACTICE, OR WE'RE TRYING TO PREVENT DISPLACEMENT. OKAY WITHOUT FURTHER COMMON OR SAYING NO ONE IN THE SPEAKERS WERE READY TO VOTE. COMMITTEE MEMORY. NO, HOWEVER, HI. WITHOUT OBJECTION, VOTING IS CLOSING. THERE ARE. FIVE YES, FOLKS AND THREE PRESENT. AND THIS WILL GO TO THE BUSINESS AT OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. WE HAVE WE HAVE ONE MORE PIECE OF LEGISLATION. AND HERE HE COMES. NOW YOU'RE JOINED BY COUNCIL MEMBER OF THE ARGENTINE E. WE'RE GONNA GIVE HIM APPROXIMATELY 45 SECONDS TO GET REGISTERED IN THE IN THE INTELLECTUAL PEOPLE WHO WANT TO LEAVE TO LEAVE QUIETLY PLEASED AS WE CONTINUE TO CARRY ON OUR BUSINESS. I WAS JUST TRYING TO WAIT FOR IT TO QUIET DOWN A LITTLE BIT. SONIA. SHE'S HAVING TROUBLE. HE'S HAVING TROUBLE GETTING IN THE SYSTEM. AND AS WE CONTINUE WITH THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA TODAY IS A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED THE BOND PROCESS AND CHAPTER SEVEN PART TWO OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND. PROPERLY MOVED IN SECOND BY COUNSELING ABOUT SEAN SECOND [01:10:06] BY COUNCILMAN INGO. WE'RE READY FOR DISCUSSION. ARGENTINA. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIRWOMAN. UH COLLEAGUES HAVE BEFORE YOU A RESOLUTION TO REVIEW A PART OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. REALLY PERTAINING TO THE BOND PROCESS AND THE BOND RELEASE PROCESS. I'M BEING A LITTLE GENERIC WITH HOW I DESCRIBE THIS BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING TO REVIEW A COUPLE ASPECTS OF IT, WHICH WAS SORT OF OUTLINED IN THE WHEREAS AND THEN THE AND THEN THE SECTIONS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. THE GENESIS OF THIS WE'RE COMPLAINTS FROM. RESIDENTS AND YOU KNOW AGAIN, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOW MUCH DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN GOING ON. YOU KNOW, MY DISTRICT COUNCILMAN FLOODS DISTRICT AND THERE IS A PROCESS IN WHICH THE DEVELOPER WHO STARTS WITH A BOND ONCE THEY HAVE DONE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF WORK. THE CITY COMES CITY MSD. THERE'S A COUPLE PARTIES INSPECT THE WORK AND THEN QUOTE, RELEASED THE BOND OR AUTHORIZED THE BOND TO BE RELEASED BACK TO THE DEVELOPER. THERE HAVE BEEN INSTANCES UM AND I DON'T WANT TO. BY ANY MEANS, DISPARAGE THE BUILDING COMMUNITY RIGHT AND THE BUILDERS THEMSELVES. SOME OF MY COMPLAINTS AND ISSUES ARE AS A MATTER OF FACT, WITH THE PROCESS THE CITY USES RIGHT AND THE WAY IN WHICH WE CHECK AND DOUBLE CHECK THESE THINGS TO ENSURE THEY'RE BEING DONE PROPERLY. SO THIS IS NO INDICTMENT ON THE INDUSTRY INDICTMENT ON ANY OF THAT. BUT I THINK IT'S HIGH TIME WE DOUBLE CHECK THIS PROCESS IN A COUPLE OF ASPECTS. NOW I'M ALSO GOING TO ASK AT SOME POINT IF A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE CAN ADOPT THE AMENDED VERSION, I'M GOING TO TALK. THROUGH THAT VERSION AND. FOR WE'LL JUST ACCEPT. WE WANNA VOTE TO ADOPT THAT AMENDMENT FIRST MADAM CHAIR AND THEN I'LL TALK ABOUT IT. YES IF THAT'S OKAY. IF WE CAN ADOPT THAT VERSION, AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE AMENDMENT BY SUBSTITUTION HAS BEEN ON THE SYSTEM ONLINE. YES ONLINE AND SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT MOTION SO THAT WE'RE ALL TALKING ABOUT THIS AND SINGING FROM THE SAME PAGE PROPERLY MOVING A SECOND BY MYSELF. AND UM, COUNSELING BET, SEAN SO WE'RE READY FOR DISCUSSION. GO AHEAD. COUNCILMAN P. ARGENTINA THANK YOU. SO ONE OF THE CHANGES WE MADE, FOR EXAMPLE, AND THESE CHANGES WERE MADE AFTER MEETING WITH THE BUILDING COMMUNITY. WE FILED THAT WE HELD IT HERE, AND I APPRECIATE THE CHAIRWOMAN FOR HOLDING DURING THAT PERIOD TO GET ADDITIONAL INPUT FROM CONSTITUENTS AND FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY. IS, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE SECOND, WHEREAS STATEMENT A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF THE BOND INSTRUMENTS PROCESS THAT WAS ONE OF THE AMENDED WORDS AND AMOUNTS IS WARRANTED, GIVEN THE PASSAGE OF TIME TO ENSURE THAT THE AMOUNTS ARE SUFFICIENT, WE ADDED THE WORD PROCESS HERE BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP THAT WE WANT TO DISCUSS DURING THIS REVIEW ONCE THE PLANNING COMMISSION GETS AHOLD OF THIS IS THERE'S FOR EXAMPLE, PUBLIC HEALTH IS ONE OF THE DEPARTMENTS THAT DOESN'T INSPECTION. THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT THE REDUNDANCY OF HAVING PUBLIC HEALTH DO SOMETHING THAT ARGUABLY MSD HAS ALREADY DOING AND WHETHER OR NOT THESE ADDITIONAL INSPECTORS ARE VALUE ADDED TO THE COMMUNITY AND JUST INCREASING COSTS FOR THE SAKE OF BUREAUCRACY. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IF YOU WANT TO BE CLEAR TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT WE DO WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE AMOUNTS. WE WANT TO LOOK AT THE PROCESS. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S DONE IN A FAIR WAY, AND I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT COMMUNICATION HERE IN A SECOND, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO ENSURE THAT IT'S BEING DONE IN THE MOST EFFICIENT MANNER POSSIBLE FOR EVERYBODY, BECAUSE INCREASED COST TO DEVELOPERS END UP GETTING PASSED ALONG TO THE COMMUNITY ANYWAY, AND WE EITHER IN THE FORM OF LESS DEVELOPMENT, WHICH INCREASES RENTS AND INCREASES HOUSING COSTS OR INCREASED COST OF THAT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH GETS PASSED ON IN THE COST OF THE OF THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT. AND I MENTIONED THIS ALSO IN THE LAST, WHEREAS CLAUSE AND I THINK THIS SORT OF SUMS IT UP WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO DO HERE AND I'LL HIGHLIGHT THE FIVE AREAS ONE. WE WANT TO SEE IF THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR ONE ADDITIONAL TYPES OF BOND INSTRUMENTS AND WHETHER THE REQUIRED INSTRUMENT SHOULD BE INCREASED. 17 YEARS AFTER THESE WERE FIRST CREATED, SO I THINK WE'RE DUE FOR A REVIEW OF THIS PROCESS, ADDITIONAL PENALTIES FOR SUBDIVIDED FOR DEVELOPERS WHO SUCCEED IN GETTING BOND INSTRUMENTS RELEASED WITHOUT PROPER CONSENT, WHICH MAKE SURE THE RULES ARE BEING FOLLOWED. BETTER COMMUNICATION WITH AN INPUT FROM THE IMPACTED PURCHASERS PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF THE BOND INSTRUMENTS. TO BE CLEAR AGAIN IN TALKING WITH THE BUILDING COMMUNITY. THERE IS SOME COMMUNICATION THAT EXISTS. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS ACCURATE. IT IS EFFICIENT AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE BUYING THAT COMMUNITY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING TO THEM. A REVIEW OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR COMPLIANCE PRIOR TO RELEASE THE BOND INSTRUMENTS. THE REASON WE'RE ADDING THAT IN WE ACTUALLY HAD A CIRCUMSTANCE AT LEAST ONE [01:15:01] AND I THINK EVEN THE BUILDING COMMUNITY SAID THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY AREA. A LOT OF TIMES THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS ADDED AFTER THE FACT WHEN THE INSPECTORS COME OUT. THEY'RE NOT REALLY LOOKING FOR THAT. AND THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE INSTANCE IN MY DISTRICT. WHERE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN WAS NOT ADHERED TO THE BOND WAS RELEASED. THE CITY CAME OUT CITED THE COMMUNITY FOR BEING IN VIOLATION OF THAT PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND THE DEVELOPER AND THE DEVELOPMENT. THE CITIZENS OF THAT AREA WERE LIKE, WELL, WAIT A SECOND. THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE BY DEVELOPER BUT THE BOND WAS RELEASED. THEY HAD ALREADY TRANSFERRED OWNERSHIP AND THERE WAS NO RECOURSE SO AND THEN FINALLY REVIEW OF THE BOND RELEASE PROCESS TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY AND REDUCE UNNECESSARY ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN AGAIN. IF THERE ARE STEPS IN THE PROCESS DURING THIS REVIEW THAT WE CAN ELIMINATE AND MAKE MORE EFFICIENT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. WE REFLECT MOST OF THIS IN SECTION ONE, ABC, WE MADE SOME PROCESS TO SEE TO BE A LITTLE MORE. OPEN TO HOW WE DISCUSS THE PARTICULARLY THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS RIGHT WHETHER THE PROCESS NOT JUST THIS SUBDIVIDE OR BUILDER, BUT OVERALL, COULD IT BE THE CITY RIGHT? BUT THAT PROCESS SHOULD IMPROVE COMMUNICATION AND TRANSPARENCY. THAT'S THE POINT, RIGHT? WE DO NOT WANT CONSTITUENTS. AND THOSE THAT HAVE BOUGHT INTO THAT COMMUNITY TO BE SURPRISED BY THE BOND BEING RELEASED. AND SOMETIMES, ALTHOUGH OUR PROFESSIONALS SHOULD BE THOROUGH IN THEIR INSPECTION, SOMETIMES CITIZENS WILL KNOW IF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE REVEALED AND CAN IMPART THAT INFORMATION TO THE INSPECTORS TO ENSURE THEY'RE CAPTURING EVERYTHING. UM. AND THEN WE ADDED, UH ADDITIONAL SECTION E. WHETHER METRO GOVERNMENT CAN WAIVE PENALTIES OR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CAN ELIMINATE LIABILITY AGAINST THE COMMUNITY FOR ANY VIOLATIONS, WHICH WE INADVERTENTLY MISSED DURING THE BOND RELEASE PROCESS AGAIN JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT ONCE THAT PROCESS IS COMPLETED. WE ARE STILL HUMANS, THE PEOPLE THAT DO THIS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OR HUMANS. THE DEVELOPERS OF HUMANS. WE'RE ALL HUMAN. WE MAKE MISTAKES. WHEN THAT MISTAKE IS MADE. WE DO NOT WANT TO TRANSFER PENALTIES AND LIABILITY TO THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T MAKE THE MISTAKES AND THAT WOULD BE THE HOME OWNERS THEMSELVES. SO THAT'S THE INTENT OF THIS WOULD GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR HOLDING THIS WHILE WE HAD TIME TO SPEAK WITH AN AMEND THIS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT COMMENTS FROM THE BUILDING COMMUNITY. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIRMAN. I THINK ALL YOUR POINTS IN THIS ARE VERY WELL TAKEN. I MEAN, THERE WAS SOME OF US WHO INHERITED PROPERTY BACK WHEN YOU KNOW LIKE THEY ECONOMIC DOWNTURN HIT SO HARD THAT THERE WERE BUILDERS AND UNFORTUNATELY DEVELOPERS WHO WENT OUT OF BUSINESS AND THEN THE BOND TO COVER SAY, SIDEWALKS OR TO PUT THE FINAL FINAL ASPHALT COATING. THE MONEY WAS GONE. I DIDN'T DIDN'T EVEN COVER WHAT WAS NEEDED TO BE. I MEAN, I'M STILL HAVE A COUPLE OF HOME AREAS AND SUBDIVISIONS WERE SAD WALKS ARE ONE LOT HAS A SIDEWALK. THE OTHER LOT DOESN'T WERE AND THEY WENT UNDER AND THERE'S NO MONEY TO PUT THE SIDEWALKS IN. SO IT'S AFTER 17 YEARS. IT IS TIME TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SEA. WHERE WHERE WE CAN MAKE THIS DO THIS A BETTER JOB ON THIS. MADAM CHILDREN. IF I COULD RESPOND THE AND AGAIN THE I TRIED TO BE TO NOT BE OVERLY PRESCRIPTIVE AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR HERE. WE REALLY WANT THE EXPERTS TO WEIGH IN WITH THE COMMUNITY TO BRING IN THE PROCESS. BUT TO YOUR POINT IT HAS BEEN QUITE A LONG TIME. WE HAVE SEEN PROBLEMS AND WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A SYSTEM THAT ARE RECTIFIED. THANK YOU. DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I HAVE NO ONE SHOWING UP ON MY COUNCILMAN REED. NO, MA'AM, THAT WAS PRIOR VOTE. IT'S JUST NOW SHOWING UP ON MY SCREEN FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. SORRY COUNCILMAN REED REASONABLY SURE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT I DID. PROBABLY NOT. THANK YOU ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? GOING ONCE GOING TWICE. THEN I THINK WE'RE READY TO VOTE. THIS IS A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A VOICE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY. WE DIDN'T VOTE. THE AMENDMENT BY SELFISH IN WE DID. I THOUGHT WE VOTED ON FAVORITE OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT BY SUBSTITUTION. THAT WAS OPPOSED BY LIKE SIGN. SAYING NONE. MOTION CARRIES SO NOW WE'RE READY TO VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDED SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT BY SUBSTITUTION SIGNIFY BY SAYING, AYE. I WAS OPPOSED BY LIKE SIGN HEARING NONE. THE RESOLUTION PASSES AND IT WILL GO TO OUT BUSINESS BECAUSE IT WAS A MEMBER BY SUBSTITUTION. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU COLLEAGUES. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE [01:20:02] ON OUR AGENDA TODAY. THANK YOU ALL AND HAVE A SAFE HALLOWEEN. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.