[1. O-014-25 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ZONING OF PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 11800 AND 11806 EAST ORELL ROAD CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 1.64 ACRES AND BEING IN LOUISVILLE METRO (CASE NO. 24ZONE0100). 1/21/25 Planning and Zoning Committee Tabled Action Required By February 21, 2025 **Council Member Crystal Bast (R-14) can vote on this zoning change** Sponsors: Markus Winkler (D-17) ]

RELATING TO THE ZONING OF PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 11,811 806 EAST ORWELL ROAD, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 1.64 ACRES AND BEING IN LOUISVILLE METRO. METRO CASE NUMBER 24, ZONE 0100. I'LL HAVE CHERYL READ OUR STATEMENT BEFORE. OH, GOOD. WE'D LIKE TO READ. SO, JULIA, ARE YOU GOING TO BE SPEAKING TO NUMBER ONE MOTION? YES. PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED. JULIA. JULIA WILLIAMS, OFFICE OF PLANNIN SO THIS IS LO C DIC 14 MCDALD' THIS AT 1 806 EAST ORWELLOAD.

THE EXISTING USE IS RESIDENTIAL WITH A PROPOSED USE OF COMMERCIAL. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF FLOWER VALE, DIXIE HIGHWAY AND THEN EAST LAUREL. THE EXISTING ZONING IS R4 IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FORM DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING C1. THE REQUEST WAS A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R4 TO C1, AND A DETAILED DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE CASE INVOLVES TWO UNDEVELOPED PARCELS, AND THE PROPOSALS FOR 3700 SQUARE FOOT MCDONALD'S WITH A DRIVE THROUGH. THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SHOWING ACCESS FOR RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT FROM DIXIE HIGHWAY, AND THEN ACCESS FULL ACCESS FROM FLOWER VALE. THESE ARE THE ELEVATIONS OF THE SITE. THESE ARE PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS IS ALONG DIXIE HIGHWAY, AND THIS IS A VIEW FROM FLOWER VALE. THESE ARE THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ACROSS FLOWER VALE. THERE'S A RESTAURANT, AND THEN AT THE INTERSECTION OF DIXIE HIGHWAY AND FLOWER VALE, THERE'S A GAS STATION ACROSS DIXIE HIGHWAY. NONRESIDENTIAL ACROSS EAST RL IS RESIDENTIAL. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH ALONG EAST LAUREL. SO THOSE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WAS HELD ON JULY 24TH, 2020 FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION MEETING WAS HELD ON OCTOBER 24TH, 2020 FOR. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ITS PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 21ST, 2024. THERE WAS A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE IN ZONING, PASSING BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 0. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU JULIA. I WANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE'VE ENJOYED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER BETTS. THIS IS IN DISTRICT 14. AND I DID GET A MESSAGE FROM COUNCILWOMAN BETTS OFFICE ASKING THAT WE READ INTO THE RECORD PARTS OF THIS EMAIL. TRAVIS, DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT FOR US, PLEASE? I'D BE HAPPY TO.

AS TRAVIS ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY, AS THE CHAIR INDICATED, THESE ARE COUNCILWOMAN BEST'S WORDS. I HAVE NOT ENCOUNTERED ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE. AFTER TAKING TIME TO REVIEW THE DETAILS, I SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL AS IT REPRESENTS POSITIVE GROWTH FOR OUR AREA. HOWEVER, I HAVE SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS REGARDING THE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC INCREASE FROM RESULTING FROM THE NEWLY APPROVED CONSTRUCTION OF 312 MULTIFAMILY UNITS NEARBY. THIS AREA OF DIXIE HIGHWAY IS ALREADY PROBLEMATIC, AND THE CURRENT ENTRANCE FROM DIXIE TO THIS PROPERTY POSES A POTENTIAL SAFETY ISSUE. I ENCOURAGE THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS TO WORK TOGETHER WITH MUTUAL RESPECT TO ADDRESS THIS CONCERN. IN THE FUTURE, IT IS ESSENTIAL TO CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY OF RELOCATING THE ENTRANCE ONCE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS APPROPRIATELY ZONED. THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO CHANGE THE FIVE YEAR PERIOD AND BINDING

[00:10:01]

ELEMENT 10 TO 10 YEARS, WHICH WOULD INCREASE THE LIKELIHOOD FOR CROSS CONNECTIVITY IN THE FUTURE. I WOULD LIKE THAT BINDING ELEMENT ADDED. TRAVIS FEASTER HAS THE DETAILS AND I DO. SO AS I JUST STATED, BINDING ELEMENT NUMBER TEN WAS ADDED, I BELIEVE, AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL. IT CURRENTLY SAYS SHOULD THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH REDEVELOP WITHIN FIVE YEARS OF METRO COUNCIL APPROVAL, A CROSS CONNECTION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY REMOVING UP TO THREE PARKING SPACES. LOCATION SHALL BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY. SO PUSHING THAT FIVE YEAR PERIOD OUT TO TEN YEARS JUST INCREASES THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THAT OTHER PROPERTY WILL REDEVELOP IN TIME TO CREATE THAT CROSS CONNECTIVITY. THAT'S NOT THE SORT OF THING WE CAN PUT ON AN APPLICANT FOREVER. WE CAN'T JUST SAY WHENEVER THE PROPERTY DEVELOPS, THAT COULD BE 100 YEARS FROM NOW, WHO KNOWS? BUT AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT MAY ALREADY BE SORT OF IN THE EARLY STAGES OF THAT PROCESS. SO HOPEFULLY THAT TEN YEAR PERIOD WILL BE ADEQUATE TIME FOR THAT PROPERTY TO GET APPROPRIATELY INAPPROPRIATE, HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN COME THROUGH AND ALLOW THAT CROSS CONNECTIVITY TO EASE SOME OF THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS AT THAT INTERSECTION. OBVIOUSLY, I CANNOT MAKE A MOTION. NEITHER CAN COUNCILWOMAN BASKIN. SHE'S NOT HERE, BUT I KNOW SHE'D LIKE THAT TO BE MOVED. SO THE BINDING ELEMENT WAS. BUT WE'D LIKE TO INCREASE THAT FIVE YEAR PERIOD TO TEN YEARS, AND THE APPLICANT HAS APPROVED. MOTION SECOND. THE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN MOTION AND SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL THOSE AGAINST. THE AYES HAVE IT. OKAY. SO DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, COUNCILMAN JOHN. SORRY I'M TRYING TO GET IN THE QUEUE. IT'S NOT REALLY COOPERATING.

THANK YOU. CHAIR. JOE, ONE THING I FAILED TO LOOK AT ON THAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS WHAT THE BUFFER IS BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO IT. THE REQUIREMENT IS A TEN FOOT BUFFER, BUT YOU COULD SEE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T START FOR ANOTHER MAYBE 20, 30FT FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. SO THIS SHOWS THE TEN FOOT BUFFER THAT'S REQUIRED. AND THEN THE DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T START UNTIL ABOUT MAYBE ABOUT 30FT OFF OF THAT. WILL THAT BUFFER BE LANDSCAPED OR FENCE. WHAT DO WE HAVE ON THERE. SO THE REQUIREMENT FOR THAT BUFFER WOULD BE A THREE FOOT SCREEN AND SOME ENTRIES ONE FOR ABOUT 50FT.

THANK YOU. BUT THE PLAN SHOWS THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THAT ALONG THAT AREA. SO THAT'S MORE THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED. THAT WORKS OUT. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE HAVE COUNCILMEMBER BRADSHAW? IS IT? I'M HAVING ISSUES WITH NAVIGATING THIS, BUT CAN YOU PUT A LIKE A MAP VIEW LIKE A BIRD VIEW OF WHERE IT GOES? AND THAT'S DIXIE HIGHWAY THERE? YES. YES. YEAH. THIS IS DIXIE. AND WHERE'S MEDORA? RIGHT BEHIND IT. BOTTOM RIGHT. OKAY.

NO, I TAKE THAT BACK. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL? YEAH, IT'S A LITTLE BIT TO THE NORTH, LIKE IT'S OFF THE SCREEN. OH, IT'S DOWN THAT FAR? OKAY. OH, I SEE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. JUST JUST WANTED TO. ANYONE ELSE WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? COUNCILWOMAN RUBY, JUST AS I WAS READING THROUGH THE NOTES, I NOTICED THAT THERE WERE TWO PEOPLE WHO SPOKE IN FAVOR OF INCREASING THE FENCE HEIGHT TO TEN FEET. SO WHAT WAS THE DISCUSSION? AND WAS THAT CONSIDERED? I DON'T BELIEVE THE APPLICANT AGREED TO TEN FEET. IT FELT LIKE EIGHT FEET WAS SUFFICIENT ENOUGH. I DON'T RECALL MUCH DISCUSSION ON THAT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THEY WANTED THE BIGGEST FENCE THEY COULD GET THERE. YES THEY DID. ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? SO NO MORE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS. THIS REQUIRES A ROLL CALL VOTE.

COUNCIL MEMBER. BIRCHER. CHAIR. YOU HAVE SEVEN YES VOTES WITH SEVEN YES VOTES. THIS PASSES AND

[00:15:09]

WILL BE FORWARDED ON TO OLD BUSINESS. SO NUMBER TWO WILL BE HELD. NUMBER THREE IS BEING HELD. NUMBER FOUR IS OUR NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11 4.7 OF THE

[4. O-023-25 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11.4.7 OF THE LOUISVILLE METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (“LDC”) REGARDING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REQUIREMENTS FOR REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLANS (CASE NO. 24-LDC-0009). 1/21/25 Planning and Zoning Committee Tabled Action Required By June 9, 2025 Sponsors: Markus Winkler (D-17) ]

LOUISVILLE METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REQUIREMENTS FOR REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLANS. CASE NUMBER 24 LDC DASH 0009 CHRISTIAN. IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED. WILL YOU BE SPEAKING TO THIS? YEAH. JOEL. LOUISVILLE METRO OFFICE OF PLANNING. THIS WAS PRESENTED AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE ON JANUARY 21ST. SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE. SO I'LL I'LL KIND OF KICK KICK IT OFF HERE. SO THIS WAS A METRO COUNCIL INITIATED STUDY. AND WENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION. AND SO THE CHANGE FROM 25% DEVIATION FROM THE ORIGINAL PLAN TO THE 10% WAS DONE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. OR IS THAT IS THAT THE WAY I READ THAT? THAT'S CORRECT. YES. THE ORIGINAL THRESHOLDS WERE 25% AS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND FROM DISCUSSION AT THAT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FROM INDIVIDUALS THAT CAME AND SPOKE AT THAT MEETING, THE REDUCTION WAS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOWN TO 10%. AND SO CAN WE TALK? CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THE 25% WAS ORIGINALLY, HOW THAT NUMBER WAS ORIGINALLY COME UP WITH? YEAH, OF COURSE. SO THE THRESHOLDS FOR WHEN A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IS REQUIRED ARE LARGELY BASED ON WHEN STAFF HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE MINOR REVISIONS TO DEVELOPMENT PLANS. SO WORKING FROM THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THRESHOLD. SO IF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS APPROVED THE ZONING CHANGE GOES THROUGH A DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS APPROVED. MINOR DEVIATIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF 25% OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE CAN BE MADE. SO WORKING FROM THAT SAME PRINCIPLE, 25% WAS PLACED ON THE DENSITY THRESHOLDS. ANY ANY NUMBER REALLY COULD HAVE BEEN PLACED ON THERE. IT'S A SMALL HANDFUL OF CASES THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS, THIS PROCESS. BUT IT WAS REALLY JUST, I DON'T WANT TO SAY ARBITRARY, BUT IT'S 10%, 15%, 25%. IT WAS REALLY AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THAT POINT. SO, SO JUST TO BE VERY CLEAR HERE, IF A IF A IF A DEVELOPMENT WAS APPROVED WITH 100 UNITS AND IT CAME BACK AT 112, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS AND HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. SAME. SAME WOULD BE TRUE, I SUPPOSE, IF IT HAD 100 UNITS ORIGINALLY AND DROPPED DOWN TO 85. WHEREAS IT IT IS MORE SPECIFICALLY THE INCREASE THE INCREASE IN DENSITY BY 25%. SO A DECREASE A DECREASE WOULD NOT TRIGGER A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, JUST AN INCREASE IN DENSITY BY 10%. WE HAD DISCUSSED, I THINK WE WERE TRYING TO FIND A BALANCE INITIALLY, AND HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AND AMONG STAFF, A BALANCE OF SMALLER PROJECTS THAT WOULD KICK IN NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. SO IF YOU'VE GOT A DEVELOPMENT OF TEN UNITS AND YOU'RE ADDING ONE UNIT, THAT'S 10%. THAT DOESN'T REALLY SEEM LIKE SOMETHING THAT WOULD NEED TO GO BACK TO A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. IT'S ONE UNIT, BUT THEN WHERE DO WE DRAW THAT LINE? AND SO THERE WAS JUST A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON, OKAY, WELL, IF IT'S TEN UNITS OR MORE OR LESS, LET'S DO THIS. IF IT'S 50 UNITS, LET'S DO THIS IF IT'S 100 UNITS. SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT WAS JUST SETTLED ON A JUST PERCENTAGE ACROSS THE BOARD. YES. THAT'S GOING TO MEAN THAT, YOU KNOW, YOUR LARGER PROJECTS CAN CAN DO MORE UNITS. BUT YEAH, AGAIN, IT WAS JUST A BASIC PERCENTAGE THAT WAS ULTIMATELY DECIDED ON. AND CAN WE CLARIFY FOR PEOPLE WHAT CHANGES IN USE.

FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT CASE IF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHANGES. SO A CHANGE IN THE USE OF THE PROPERTY. A COUPLE EXAMPLES WOULD BE LIKE FROM A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE TO ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY OR SAY LIKE A RESTAURANT TO A CAR WASH, NOT FROM ONE OFFICE USER TO ANOTHER OFFICE USER, NOT FROM LIKE A MEDICAL OFFICE TO A DENTAL OFFICE. CHANGES THAT WOULD ALSO PROBABLY FACILITATE UPDATING YOUR YOUR BUILDING PERMITS FOR A CHANGE OF USE. TO CHANGE THE

[00:20:04]

OCCUPANCY OF THE SPACE. SO THAT THAT'S WHAT WE WERE THINKING AS FAR AS A CHANGE OF THE USE OF THE PROPERTY, THERE WERE SOME CONVERSATIONS AROUND A CHANGE OF A USE TO A USE THAT'S NOT LISTED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS REALLY IF YOU'RE CHANGING AT THAT POINT, YOU'RE CHANGING THE ZONING. SO, I MEAN, AND THEN DO WE WANT A CHANGE OF USE THAT ALLOWS FOR A USE THAT IS IN A LOWER ZONING DISTRICT? FROM, SAY, A C2, IF YOU'RE GOING FROM A COMMERCIAL USE TO AN OFFICE USE IN C2. BUT ULTIMATELY, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE SETTLED ON JUST KIND OF THESE A GENERAL JUST A CHANGE IN THE USE OF THE PROPERTY AS A JUST AN ALL ENCOMPASSING TERM FOR, FOR THAT CHANGE OF USE, BUT MORE SO RELATED TO A CHANGE IN THE OCCUPANCY OF THE STRUCTURE. SO THAT CHANGE IN USE WOULD OR WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO HAVE IT WOULD REQUIRE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. IT WOULD REQUIRE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. NOW, WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN REQUIRED PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE? NO, IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN. NO. SO PRIOR TO PRIOR TO THIS. TEXT AMENDMENT, THERE WAS NO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REQUIRED FOR A REVISED DETAILED DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO IF YOU RECEIVED A ZONING CHANGE IN 2024 AND YOU WENT TO REVISE THE PLAN, YOU WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GO TO A COMMITTEE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THAT REVISION. IF IT HIT A THRESHOLD OF NEEDING COMMITTEE REVIEW, IF IT WAS REZONED IN 2024 AND THE CHANGE WAS 100FT■!S TO ADD A, YU KNOW, MAYBE A CANOPY OVER AN OUTDOOR SPACE, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO GO TO A COMMITTEE. STAFF CAN CAN HANDLE SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT YEAH, THE WAY THAT IT'S WORDED, IF ADOPTED, ANY REVISED DETAILED DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT IS SUBMITTED WITHIN THREE YEARS OF A ZONING CHANGE BEING APPROVED, IF IT HITS CERTAIN THRESHOLDS, IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. AND THEN JUST FOR CLARIFICATION ONE MORE TIME, THEN I'LL OPEN IT UP.

IF BEYOND THE THREE YEAR PERIOD, THIS DOESN'T AFFECT THAT. CORRECT. SO THIS IS ONLY REVISED DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLANS THAT ARE REVISED WITHIN THE THREE YEAR THRESHOLD. YEAH. THE RESOLUTION FROM COUNCIL WAS REALLY WANTED TO GET AT THOSE. THE APPEARANCE OF A BAIT AND SWITCH A QUICK TURNAROUND A QUICK CHANGE THAT APPEARED AS THOUGH IT WAS PRESENTED AS SOMETHING AND NOW IT'S SOMETHING ELSE. SO REALLY THAT QUICK TIME FRAME OF THREE YEARS WITHIN THE ZONING CHANGE AND THEN REQUIRING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. THEN OUR STAFF WORK THROUGH THESE THRESHOLDS FOR HOW TO DETERMINE WHAT IS GOING TO REQUIRE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING OR NOT REQUIRE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING BASED ON SOME ABILITIES BY STAFF TO APPROVE PLANS, AND THEN TRYING TO WORK WITH, YOU KNOW, THE INCREASE IN HEIGHT IS SOMETHING, SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S ALSO GOING TO REQUIRE A PUBLIC MEETING. SO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IN ADVANCE. THERE WAS ONE OTHER ONE OTHER CHANGE IN HERE. ANY SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION IN BUILDING OR SITE DESIGN.

THAT'S NOT THE RESULT OF A UTILITY OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT. SO THOSE SIGNIFICANT DEVIATIONS WOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR. I MEAN, THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN BUILDING MATERIALS, STYLE DESIGN FROM SAY, TOWNHOUSES TO APARTMENTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A KIND OF CATCH ALL, IF YOU'RE NOT CAPTURED BY THE FIRST FLOOR, THAT THE DIRECTOR HAS DISCRETION TO MAKE THAT CALL. OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY IN THE IN THE QUEUE. YOU GOT COUNCILMAN JOHN. WHAT? BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT UPDATED.

COUNCILMEMBER BATSON. THANK YOU, CHAIR JOE. I THINK I'M JUST SLIGHTLY CONFUSED. I GUESS IS THE PROPER TERM TO USE, BECAUSE IN ONE SENSE, I THINK THAT I UNDERSTAND IT MAKES SENSE. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S JUST AN ADDED LAYER OF BUREAUCRACY THAT WE'RE ADJUSTING THINGS. NOW LET'S, FOR EXAMPLE, SAY. WE TOOK A ZONING CASE AND IT WENT FROM, I'M GOING TO GO BACKWARDS, RIGHT? LET'S SAY R FIVE TO R4. AND THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD. WHAT, I DON'T KNOW, WHAT'S THE NUMBER TEN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. AND THEY DID 17. IS THAT GOING TO REQUIRE THIS TO BE ENACTED. IT WOULD APPEAR THAT WAY FROM HOW IT'S DRAFTED CURRENTLY. OKAY. LET'S SAY IT'S ZONED FROM R4 TO R5 AND ORIGINALLY IT'S GOING TO BE SINGLE UNIT TOWNHOMES KIND OF ON

[00:25:03]

THAT SPACE. AND THEN THEY DECIDED THEY WANTED TO DO DUPLEXES. DOES THAT ARE THE NUMBER OF UNITS CHANGING. WE'LL JUST SAY NO FOR LET'S SAY NO. IT'S STILL GOING TO TRIGGER A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING BECAUSE THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION IN BUILDING OR SITE DESIGN THAT IS NOT THE RESULT OF UTILITY OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS. DO WE HAVE ANY FEEDBACK ON THE COMMISSIONERS THAT VOTED NO TO THIS? AGAIN, I WAS ASKED THAT QUESTION AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE ON JANUARY 21ST. AND AS I STATED THEN, THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS DO NOT HAVE TO GIVE A REASON FOR A NO VOTE. ALL I CAN DO IS SPECULATE FROM THE CONVERSATIONS THAT THAT WE'VE HAD, THAT IT ADDS TIME, COST, UNCERTAINTY TO THE PROCESS AND WHAT IS ULTIMATELY THE GOAL AND NECESSITY OF REQUIRING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. AND I THINK WE'VE RESPONDED TO THAT NECESSITY OR THE GOAL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING BY DRAFTING SOME SPECIFIC LANGUAGE TO SAY THIS IS REALLY JUST INFORMATIONAL, IT'S TO LET FOLKS KNOW IN ADVANCE OF AN APPLICATION BEING FILED. BUT NO, AS FAR AS THOSE NO VOTES ON THAT, IF THEY DIDN'T MAKE ANY SPECIFIC STATEMENTS, I DON'T HAVE ANY REASON AS TO WHY THEY VOTED NO. THANK YOU. CAN I HAVE ONE FOLLOW UP, PLEASE? IN THE SENSE NOW LET'S SAY A ZONING GETS CHANGED. LET'S SAY WE'RE GOING FROM R4 TO R5 OR R5 TO COMMERCIAL. AND THERE'S A THERE'S A SLIGHT CHANGE. IT'S NOT DRASTIC, BUT I DO YOU FEEL THAT. AND I GUESS I'M ASKING THE COMMITTEE'S OPINION ON THIS AS WELL. BUT IT OPENS THE DOOR AGAIN FOR THAT TO POSSIBLY GET OVERTURNED IN A ZONING CASE AND STOP THE PROJECT. IF YOU'RE BRINGING IT BACK TO ZONING FOR THIS ADJUSTMENT, ALLOWING THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO OPEN UP THEIR THEIR FEEDBACK TO PROTEST AGAINST SOMETHING. IS THAT KIND OF MAKES SENSE? I DON'T WANT TO GIVE SPECIFICS INTO SOME RECENT THINGS. WE'VE SEEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS ON, BUT THERE WAS CONCERN EXPRESSED ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND IT NOT BEING A ESSENTIALLY A LET'S GO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE OKAY WITH THAT. WE SUBMIT THE REVISED PLAN. IT IT IS SET UP TO BE INFORMATIONAL ONLY TO TAKE ANY FEEDBACK NECESSARY, WHICH ALSO CREATES A LOT OF CONCERN IN THE COMMUNITY.

YOU'RE GOING TO THE COMMUNITY AND YOU'RE ASKING YOU'RE GIVING THEM INFORMATION, WHICH IS ANOTHER REASON WHY WE SET UP THE LETTER TO BE INFORMATIONAL ONLY, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR FEEDBACK ON WHAT TO DO. THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES IN ESSENCE. AND SO WE WANTED TO SET UP TO SET IT UP TO WHERE IT WOULD BE A PURELY INFORMATIONAL MEETING. AND THEY CAN USE THAT FEEDBACK IF THEY WANT. IF THEY WANT TO TAKE THAT FEEDBACK AND SAY, THIS IS GOING TO BE TOO MUCH OF A FIGHT TO GET A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTED AND APPROVED, THEY'LL BE MAKING THAT DECISION, MUCH LIKE AN INDIVIDUAL HOLDING A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FOR A ZONING CHANGE. IT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF THE COMMENTS AND CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOST INFORMATION POSSIBLE. SO, COUNCILMAN VACHON, A LOT OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN AD HOC LAND USE COMMITTEE LAST YEAR WAS TRYING TO CREATE MORE EFFICIENCY AND CREATE, STREAMLINE THE PROCESS. AND THIS DOES NOT DO THAT. THIS IS THE OPPOSITE OF THAT. SO I'LL JUST SO THIS THIS WAS STARTED AS WE REMEMBER THERE'S BEEN CONCERN ABOUT BAIT AND SWITCH. AND THE MY PRIMARY CONCERN ABOUT BAIT AND SWITCH BUT ALSO ABOUT THE COUNTER TO BAIT AND SWITCH IS WHAT REALLY CONSTITUTES A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE. AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT 10% RATHER THAN 25% IS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN MY MIND. I DON'T CARE HOW MANY UNITS YOU GOT OR HOW MUCH DENSITY YOU HAVE, OR HOW MANY SQUARE FOOTAGE YOU HAVE, 10% IS AN EXTREMELY MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. IN FACT, 85% IS A FAIRLY MINOR CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. WE ALREADY HAVE A PROCESS THAT IS THAT IS ONE OF THE LONGEST IN THE COUNTRY COMPARED TO OUR PEER CITIES. WE TAKE THE LONGEST TO GET THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE VERY PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE AND TRY TO WEIGH THE BALANCE OF ALERTING THE NEIGHBORS TO WHAT'S HAPPENING AND WHAT'S CHANGING, WHICH I THINK IS IMPORTANT, BUT ALSO LENGTHENING THE PROCESS AND HOW LONG IT TAKES AND HOW MUCH MONEY IT COSTS TO GET A PROJECT THROUGH. COUNCIL. THANK YOU VERY

[00:30:14]

MUCH. SO I'VE GOT SEVERAL QUESTIONS HERE. 10% DENSITY DOES SEEM VERY MINOR, BUT IT ALSO CAUGHT ME AN INCREASE IN THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT BY 25%. THAT'S A TO ME THAT'S A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE FOOTPRINT OR 500FT■!S. THAT'S LE THE SIZE OF MY OFFICE. AND THAT WOULD CALL FOR A REVIEW. THAT JUST SOUNDS CRAZY TO ME RIGHT THERE. AND THEN AS YOU TALK ABOUT THE MEETING WOULD BE PURELY INFORMATIONAL. THAT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE GIVING THE CITIZENS THE CHANCE TO TALK, BUT YOU'RE NOT REALLY LISTENING TO THEM BECAUSE IT'S PURELY INFORMATIONAL. AND I FEEL LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO BE MISLED THAT YOU'RE HAVING THIS MEETING. AND NO, WE DON'T GET TO CHANGE ANYTHING YOU'RE GOING TO DO. THIS IS JUST ADVICE. THIS IS WHAT WE THINK YOU SHOULD DO, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO ANYWAY. SO I HAVE SOME REAL CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. SO YEAH, AS I READ THIS, IT'S LIKE, I DON'T THINK THIS IS READY FOR PRIME TIME. COUNCILMAN HUDSON. THANK YOU. CHAIR. SO MY QUESTIONS I'M GOING TO JUMP TO LET'S JUST SAY EVERYTHING HAS HAS FALLEN INTO PLACE. THAT HAS TRIGGERED A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. WOULD WOULD THIS ORDINANCE BE THE APPROPRIATE VENUE TO TALK ABOUT THE THINGS THAT GO INTO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, FOR EXAMPLE? THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT NOW, THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT GET NOTIFIED ARE THE ONES THAT OWN PROPERTY ADJACENT TO OR MAYBE TOO DEEP INTO THE PERIMETER OF THE LOT THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED FOR REZONING. IS THERE ANY APPETITE TO WADE DEEPER INTO THE WATERS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, OF THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD TO GET MORE PEOPLE INFORMED OF, OF A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THAT'S COMING ALONG? AND THEN SECONDLY, AT OUR LAST MEETING, WE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THAT ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD IS PREDOMINANTLY A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE SPEAKING NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHAT KIND OF PROVISIONS CAN WE PUT IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY, THEY HAVE A TRANSLATOR THERE OR SOME WAY TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK AND, AND BE HEARD TO COUNCIL? COUNCILWOMAN RUBY'S POINT, WOULD THIS BE THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THAT OR SHOULD WE TAKE THAT OFF AND DO IT SEPARATELY? I THINK I CAN ANSWER THAT. ANSWER THAT, COUNCILMAN, IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT. OKAY. SO THIS ORDINANCE IS JUST PROPOSING CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MIGHT BE TRIGGERED. THE YOU KNOW, THE RESOLUTION DIDN'T REQUEST ANY CHANGES TO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS THEMSELVES. AND SO THERE HASN'T BEEN THE SORT OF PUBLIC LEAD UP TO THAT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING ON THOSE TYPES OF CHANGES. SO AT THIS TIME, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE AS CONSIDERATION OF THIS ORDINANCE. BUT I'M HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOUR OFFICE IF YOU'D LIKE TO PROPOSE A RESOLUTION ON THOSE TOPICS. FAIR ENOUGH. THANK YOU. AND IF I MAY, TO ANSWER A COUPLE OF YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT NOTICE.

SO WHEN NOTICE IS REQUIRED OF AN OF AN APPLICATION, IT'S NOT JUST REQUIRED TO OWNERS IT'S REQUIRED TO RESIDENTS. SO FIRST AND SECOND TIER ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS AND CURRENT RESIDENTS.

THERE ARE APPLICANTS THAT GO BEYOND THAT FIRST AND SECOND TIER. AND JUST NOTICE WHAT THEY THINK IS APPROPRIATE WITH RESPECT TO THE DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT LANGUAGES. OUR OFFICE HAS BEEN WORKING REALLY, REALLY HARD AS OF LATE TO TRY AND ADDRESS MANY OF THESE LANGUAGE ACCESS ISSUES AND HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE OFFICE OF IMMIGRANT AFFAIRS AND OUR VENDOR, WHICH IS VOYANCE, WHICH I BELIEVE GOES BY A DIFFERENT NAME, TO TRY AND WORK ON PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES FOR SIMULTANEOUS INTERPRETATION, AS WELL AS ON DEMAND INTERPRETATION AT PUBLIC HEARINGS, AS WELL AS ADDRESSING WHAT WE CAN WITH THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF PAPER SPACE THAT WE HAVE TO ADD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGES. YEAH, AND I KNOW YOU'RE DOING A LOT OF GOOD WORK THERE, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN RAYMOND. THANK YOU. I THINK I'M RESTATING SOME OF WHAT'S BEEN SAID, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND. SO THIS ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, IF THIS ORDINANCE WERE TO PASS, IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE ANOTHER HOOP TO JUMP THROUGH FOR THE BUILDERS. AND I WANT TO CLARIFY NOTHING THAT WOULD HAPPEN OR THAT WOULD BE SAID BY NEIGHBORS AT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WOULD AFFECT THE OUTCOME. IN SHORT, NOT NECESSARILY OKAY. SAY THAT WE DON'T APPROVE THIS AND DENSITY OR FOOTPRINT IS CHANGED ON A ON A DEVELOPMENT BY 18%. HOW ELSE WOULD NEIGHBORS FIND OUT ABOUT IT? THE REQUIRED

[00:35:03]

PUBLIC MEETING. RIGHT NOW A MEETING IS NOT REQUIRED UNLESS IT'S 25%. RIGHT FOR DENSITY. IF YOU'RE CHANGING THE DENSITY OF THE PROPERTY, IT'S GOING TO KICK IN A PUBLIC MEETING. IT'S NOT GOING TO KICK IN A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. BUT IF YOU'RE CHANGING THE DENSITY, IF THE ZONING IS CHANGED ON A PROPERTY AND YOU'RE INCREASING THE DENSITY OF THAT PROPERTY, IT'S GOING TO A PUBLIC MEETING. IT JUST DOESN'T REQUIRE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING RIGHT NOW. SO THERE IS THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS. YEAH. I'M SORRY OF THE CHANGE. YES. CURRENTLY, IF YOU HAVE A REVISED PLAN THAT CHANGES THE DENSITY OF THE PROPERTY, THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE A COMMITTEE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND PUBLIC NOTICE IS SENT TO FIRST AND SECOND TIER ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS AND CURRENT RESIDENTS, AS WELL AS SENT VIA GOV DELIVERY, WHICH IS OUR EMAIL DELIVERY SYSTEM. THANK YOU. HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU THINK IT WOULD ADD TO A PROJECT IF WE APPROVED THIS? WE'VE ATTEMPTED TO MAKE THIS TIME FRAME OUTSIDE OF OUR PROCESS, SO THAT IT'S REQUIRED BEFORE THE APPLICATION IS EVEN MADE, SO IT'S NOT TIED TO ANY OF OUR TIME FRAMES OR REVIEWS. SO INSTEAD OF REQUIRING THE APPLICATION AND THEN A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, WE ARE REQUIRING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING BEFORE YOU CAN EVEN FILE THE APPLICATION. OKAY. I'M CONCERNED THAT THAT OFFERING A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WHERE FOLKS DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE A MEANINGFUL CHANCE TO MAKE CHANGES MORE PERFORMATIVE. AND IT'S AN EFFORT TO MAKE PEOPLE FEEL HEARD, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, MIGHT, MIGHT GIVE THEM ANOTHER FORUM IN WHICH THEY FEEL DISREGARDED. THAT'S MY WORRY. THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR. SORRY ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I WOULD FIRST OF ALL, I UNDERSTAND YOU KNOW, THE ADDITIONAL TIME THAT EVERYBODY THE ARGUMENT THAT EVERYONE'S MAKING. BUT I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 10% ON SOMETHING THAT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT TO BEGIN WITH, THAT'S PRETTY THAT CAN CHANGE THE THING PRETTY DRAMATICALLY.

SO IF YOU HAVE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN MY OPINION THAT WHEN IT COMES TO CONSTITUENTS, IT'S BETTER TO OVERCOMMUNICATE THAN OVERCOMMUNICATE TO GIVE THEM THAT ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY.

WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAD BEEN APPROVED THAT THEY FELT LIKE THEY WERE IN, THEY WERE THEY WERE PART OF THE PROCESS. AND THEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS WHERE THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE EXCLUDED. SO, YOU KNOW, I'M VERY EMPATHETIC WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPERS. AND I THINK THAT WHEN IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE, WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THINGS EASIER RATHER THAN MORE DIFFICULT. I THINK THERE ARE LOTS OF OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN DO RATHER THAN THIS TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN IN OUR PROCESS, BUT IN THIS CASE, AND WE'VE HAD SITUATIONS OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS AND ONE WITH ME AND ONE RECENTLY WITH COUNCILWOMAN HAWKINS, WHERE, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPER CHANGED AT THE LAST MINUTE. AND EVEN IF THE RESIDENTS DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, REALLY TO IMPACT THE FINAL DECISION TO GIVE THEM THAT CHANCE TO GET ON THE RECORD, I THINK IS A IS A IS A IS A GOOD THING. YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD MAKE THEM BE AS INCLUSIVE AS POSSIBLE AND HOPEFULLY THIS WON'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN ANYWAY. YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE JUST MAYBE 2 OR 3 TIMES A YEAR IF THAT. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF IT.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN BRATCHER. MR. CHAIR, IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME, I HAVE A FEW POINT OF ORDER TYPE QUESTIONS. NUMBER ONE, ARE ORDINANCES SPONSORED BY A MEMBER. IS THAT IS THIS SPONSORED BY A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL? SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, IN WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST IN THIS THIS WAS THIS ONE WAS SPONSORED. GENERALLY SPEAKING, IN THE PAST THESE HAVE BEEN SPONSORED BY COUNCILWOMAN FLOOD, WHO WAS THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE. SO ALL OF THE ORDINANCE, ALL THE ALL THE ISSUES THAT CAME UP IN PLANNING AND ZONING WERE SPONSORED BY THE CHAIR. THIS IN THIS CASE, WAS KIND OF AN IN-BETWEEN TIME FRAME. AND SO I THINK THE AGREEMENT WAS THAT AT THE TIME, PRESIDENT WINKLER WOULD BE THE SPONSOR OF EVERYTHING THAT FELL IN BETWEEN THE CHAIR, CHAIRMANSHIP OF COUNCILWOMAN FLOOD AND ME. SO THAT'S WHY THIS WOMAN ENDED UP AS A SPONSOR BEING WINKLER. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, IN THIS COMMITTEE, THE SPONSOR IS THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE. A COUPLE MORE DOES THE PLANNING COMMISSION, DID THEY CREATE THE LANGUAGE OR DID THE SPONSOR CREATE THE LANGUAGE, LIKE IN FRANKFORT? YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATOR MAKES THE LANGUAGE AND, OR, YOU KNOW, WITH THE WITH THE HELP OF THE LRC, BUT DOES THE DID YOU GUYS CREATE THIS OR DID MADONNA FLOOD CREATE IT? YES. SO THE SO THE RESOLUTION THAT OR THE ORDINANCE IT GIVES US DIRECTION. AND THAT DIRECTION WAS TO FOR THE PLANNING

[00:40:02]

COMMISSION ESSENTIALLY TO RESEARCH AND REVIEW AND PUT FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS. AND SO THE LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN CRAFTED TO REQUIRE THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING HAS BEEN CRAFTED BY THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND IT'S BEEN REVIEWED IN A PUBLIC HEARING, AS REQUIRED BY LAW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IF I COULD ADD JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE THERE. SO THIS ORIGINATED WITH A RESOLUTION BY COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBERS. MCCRANEY I WANT TO SAY, ARTHUR, MY DOCUMENTS, NOT LOADING MCCRANEY. HAWKINS ARTHUR PARISH, RIGHT, AND PRESIDENT WINKLER HAD ALL JUMPED ON TO SPONSORS TO THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION. SO THAT SET UP SORT OF OUR FRAMEWORK AND THEN STAFF DID THEIR WORK, CAME UP WITH THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE, PRESENTED THAT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THAT'S BEFORE US. DOES THIS COMMITTEE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING BRING PEOPLE THAT OPPOSE AND ARE PRO ON THIS, OR DOES THAT AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL? IT'S AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL. THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC HEARING AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. WE'RE JUST SAYING YES OR NO TO WHAT THEY COME UP WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, RIGHT? YES. BASED ON THE RECORD OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. RIGHT. AND IN THE CASE OF TEXT AMENDMENTS LIKE THIS, YOU COULD ALSO CHANGE IT. SO IF YOU ALL LIKE EVERYTHING THEY'RE PROPOSING, BUT YOU THINK THE 10% IS TOO LOW, YOU COULD MAKE THAT 15 OR 20 FOR EXAMPLE. WELL. AND WHERE WOULD THAT BE DONE AT HERE OR AT FULL COUNCIL? WOULD THAT BE AN AMENDMENT. YES. OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. YOU KNOW MY DISTRICT AND GOSH, IF YOU'RE IF YOU HAVE A DISTRICT OUTSIDE OF THE WATTERSON OR ESPECIALLY OUTSIDE OF GENE SNYDER, YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF GRASS AND TREES OUT THERE AND WE'RE GOING TO BE DEVELOPING LIKE CRAZY. AND I LOVE THE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, AND I PLAY GOLF WITH THEM ALL THE TIME. AND BUT MAN, THEIR THEIR PROCESS OF TAKING TOO LONG, WE GOT TO GET IT RIGHT I THINK. AND I'VE GOT NEIGHBORS MAD ALL THE TIME WITH THINGS BEING BUILT AND SOME OF IT'S WARRANTED AND MOST OF IT'S NOT TO BE FRANK, BUT LIKE COUNCILMAN REED SAID, YOU CAN'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION IN MY IN MY OPINION, NOW 10% SEEMS KIND OF LOW. BUT MAN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET A IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE WORKING TO GET A, A LONGHORN RESTAURANT SOMEWHERE ON A CORNER AND YOU END UP WITH A CAR WASH, TO ME THAT'S A BREAKDOWN OF THE SYSTEM HERE. AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF WHAT THIS WOULD DO. RIGHT? PREVENT THAT. IS THAT THE SAY SAY YOU'RE SAY YOU'RE ZONING, YOU'RE WANTING TO GO COMMERCIAL OR WHATEVER IT IS FOR A RESTAURANT BECAUSE IT'S ON HERE AS AN EXAMPLE. AND YOU END UP WITH A CAR WASH AND EVERYBODY'S LIKE, WHAT HAPPENED IS THAT. AM I MAKING THE REVISED PLAN? PROCEDURES WILL NOT PREVENT THE CAR WASH. IF THE PROPERTY IS ZONED COMMERCIALLY AND ALLOWS FOR A RESTAURANT AND A CAR WASH, THAT IS THE CONTROLLING REGULATION. THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REQUIREMENT ONLY TRIGGERS THE NEED TO GO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TELL THEM WHAT YOU INTEND TO DO AND APPLY FOR.

THAT IS THE REQUIREMENT. WHAT'S THE STANDARD DEVIATION? THE STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT WOULD, A BINDING ELEMENT WOULD. THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD ATTACH A BINDING ELEMENT. RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR BEING PATIENT WITH ME. YEAH. NO. AND YOU AND LAST TIME YOU ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT THE TOTAL PROCESS AND I EXPLAINED THAT SHOULD THIS AMENDMENT BE ADOPTED, IF YOU HAVE A ZONING CHANGE APPROVED IN 2023 AND SAY THAT ZONING CHANGES FOR C-1 AND THEY'VE PROPOSED A CAR WASH IN THAT, IN THAT COMMERCIAL ZONING, AND NOW THEY WANT TO DO A RESTAURANT THAT CHANGE OF USE TO A RESTAURANT UNDER THIS NEW ORDINANCE IS GOING TO KICK IN A NEED TO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. IT'S ALSO GOING TO REQUIRE, BECAUSE IT ALREADY REQUIRES A PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE. AND GIVEN THE PRACTICE OF THIS COMMITTEE, IT'S ALSO GOING TO REQUIRE METRO COUNCIL REVIEW BECAUSE OF THE USE OF THE STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT THAT THEN KICKS IN METRO COUNCIL'S REVIEW FOR CHANGES OF USE AND OTHER DEVIATIONS. SO IF THERE'S A CHANGE, A DEVIATION THAT'S THAT'S RIGHT. NOW CURRENTLY IN THE LAW, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE SYSTEM EXCEPT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. THIS WOULD ADD THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING TO THE WHOLE NEW PROCESS. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR I APPRECIATE IT. COUNCILMAN. THANK YOU. CHAIR. JOEL, THANK YOU FOR BEING EXTREMELY PATIENT WITH US HERE. I'M I UNDERSTAND, I THINK THE WHAT WE'RE INTENDING ON DOING HERE AND I 100% AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN REED AND HIS COMMENTS AS WELL. MY CONCERN IS THAT WE'RE WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE TOO

[00:45:01]

FAR IN THE WEEDS. SOMETHING THAT COUNCILWOMAN RAYMOND BROUGHT UP, WHICH TRIGGERED ME TO GET BACK IN THE QUEUE, WAS, IF WE'RE ALREADY DOING THE PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE THE APPLICANT FILES, YOU KNOW, OR WHEN THE APPLICANT FILES WITH PLAN A, IT COMES TO COUNCIL, IT'S BEFORE US. IT WE PUT THE STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT ON IT. IT MOVES FORWARD. ANY ADDITIONAL CHANGES IT COMES BACK TO COUNCIL FOR THAT ADJUSTMENT. I DON'T SEE THE PURPOSE OF THIS. IF WE ALREADY HAVE THAT RIGHT.

BUT THEN AN EXAMPLE POPS INTO MY HEAD OF LET'S SAY YOU'RE BUILDING A HOME AND YOU'RE ON AN R4 PROPERTY AND YOU'RE BUILDING 2500FT■!S. WELL, YOU DECIDE, OHI NEED AN EXTRA BEDROOM HERE, AND IT'S 700FT■!S. ARE WE GOING TO W INFORM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE'RE ADDING ANOTHER ROOM TO OUR HOME? DO YOU SEE WHERE I. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE GETTING IN THE WEEDS HERE. YEAH, I THINK THE SHORT ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS NO. BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF HOW A ZONING CHANGE TO LIKE AN R4 OR AN R5 WOULD WORK, BECAUSE WITH A CHANGE IN ZONING TO R4, R5, WHICH ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, WE'LL APPROVE THE LOTS, BUT WE WON'T LOOK AT THE SIZE OF THE HOMES.

WE WON'T LOOK AT THE DESIGN OF THE HOMES. IT'S NOT REALLY PERTINENT TO THE DISCUSSION OF A SUBDIVISION, IF THAT STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT IS NOT IN THERE, THEN CORRECT. THE STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT WOULDN'T REQUIRE A REVIEW OF THE INDIVIDUAL HOMES. THOSE ARE. THOSE ARE PERMITTED INDIVIDUALLY. HOME BY HOME BY HOME BY HOME. SO IF I'M GOING TO USE AN EXAMPLE, I THINK LAST YEAR OR THE YEAR BEFORE WE APPROVED A ZONING. AT REGENCY LOUISVILLE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IT'S OVER OFF MANSLICK. AND WE WERE PUTTING IT IN AND IT WAS AN R4. I THINK IT WENT FROM R4, R5, AND THE ORIGINAL USE OF THAT LAND WAS TRAILER PARKS, AND THEY'RE PUTTING IN THESE PREFABBED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, YOU KNOW, AND IT WENT THROUGH SO MUCH SCRUTINY AND, AND DEVELOPMENT CHANGES AND THEY BROUGHT IT BACK AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. NOW, IF HE DECIDED TO GO THE DEVELOPER, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A HE OR SHE, BUT WANTED TO GO BACK INTO THE MOBILE HOMES OR DECIDED TO GO SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS LIKE JUST STICK BUILT PER PER UNIT LIKE WE HAVE THAT STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT THAT REQUIRES THEM TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE TO GET THE APPROVAL. WHERE DOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FALL INTO PLACE THERE? BECAUSE THEN NOW WE'RE JUST ADDING ANOTHER LAYER OF WHAT WE'RE ALREADY GOING TO BE DOING.

SO THE MOBILE HOME AND PREFAB DILEMMA IS A LITTLE DIFFICULT BECAUSE THAT'S A WHOLE ANOTHER CAN OF WORMS. BUT YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE ASKING WHEN DOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING KICK IN? I MEAN, IF YOU'VE GONE THROUGH A ZONING CHANGE AND YOU'VE GOTTEN THAT APPROVAL AND THEN YOU'VE REVISED THE PLAN ALREADY, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? AND THEN YOU REVISE IT AGAIN? YEAH, LET'S SAY WE'VE WE'VE GOT THE PLAN IN. WE'VE GOT IT. SAY WE'RE GOING TO BUILD, YOU KNOW, 500 APARTMENT UNITS MULTIFAMILY AND WE'VE GOT ROOM FOR AN EXTRA 50 ON THIS PIECE OVER HERE. I NEED TO COME BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING ALREADY TO ADD THAT REVISED PIECE. CORRECT. IF YEAH, IF THAT STANDARD BINDING ELEMENT IS ON THERE. AND THEN IF THOSE 50 UNITS WEREN'T SHOWN ON THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IT MEETS THE 10% THRESHOLD TO DO THAT REVISED PLAN. SO WE HAVE TO ADD IT WOULD HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, PUBLIC MEETING, METRO COUNCIL. I UNDERSTAND YOU, I UNDERSTAND I JUST I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD FULLY AROUND. IS THERE A BETTER WAY TO BE MORE INFORMATIONAL TO OUR CONSTITUENTS VERSUS ADDING ANOTHER LAYER OF BUREAUCRACY TO THE PROCESS? TO REMOVE THE NEED TO HAVE THE MEETING ITSELF? JUST A NOTICE CAN BE SENT WITHOUT REQUIRING A MEETING. A NOTICE OF THE INTENT TO APPLY COULD BE SUBSTITUTED, BUT IT SEEMS OXYMORON ISH, I GUESS. HERE WE'RE GOING TO SEND YOU A NOTICE THAT SAYS WE ARE INFORMING YOU TO THAT WE'RE GOING WE'RE HAVING A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ABOUT THIS CHANGE. BUT AGAIN, YOUR OPINION TRULY DOESN'T MATTER. I MEAN, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS A SET OF REGULATIONS FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. THE LOUISVILLE METRO AND OTHER PUBLIC ENTITIES AREN'T SUBJECT TO IT, SO IT ONLY CONTROLS WHAT YOU CAN DO ON YOUR LAND. OKAY, NO FURTHER

[00:50:02]

QUESTIONS. SORRY. THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN RUBY. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. SO THE DEVELOPER SAYS I WANT TO CHANGE THEIR PLAN. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING, AND THIS IS WHAT I'M GOING TO DO. BUT THE COMMUNITY DOESN'T REALLY HAVE AN INPUT, SO THEY'RE STILL GOING TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. SO IN THE INSTANCE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT OVER ON THE CRUMBS LANE THAT WE HAD SO MUCH OF A BROUHAHA ABOUT WHERE THEY WENT FROM TOWNHOUSES TO APARTMENTS. SO THE PUBLIC MEETING WOULD NOT CHANGE WHAT THEY'RE DECIDING TO DO. CORRECT.

SO THERE'S NOT. SO THIS IS MOSTLY JUST TO. ASSUAGE IS MAYBE NOT THE RIGHT WORD, BUT TO LET THE NEIGHBORS KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO. BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING. IS THAT CORRECT? I MEAN, A DEVELOPER CAN AFTER THEY HAVE TO HOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, THEY COULD CHANGE ANYTHING THEY WANTED. BUT THIS MEETING ISN'T SET UP ESSENTIALLY, AS THE CONCERN WAS THAT LIKE A ZONING MEETING, LIKE A ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION MEETING WHERE IT HAS THE APPEARANCE OF MORE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, THAT THIS MEETING WOULD ALSO BE A MEETING IN WHICH RESIDENTS OR COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE INVITED TO GIVE THEIR FEEDBACK ON WHAT THEY WANT DONE, AND THAT IS JUST NOT WHAT. THAT'S JUST NOT THE NATURE OF REVISED, DETAILED DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY. SO WHAT WE WANTED TO DO WAS SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT THIS WAS NOT A COMMUNITY MEETING TO INFORM THE DEVELOPER OF WHAT YOU WANTED TO SEE THERE, BECAUSE THE ZONING CHANGE MEETING IS REALLY WHAT THAT'S FOR. THE ZONING CHANGE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IS WHERE A DEVELOPMENT GROUP OR A PROPERTY OWNER GOES, AND THEY'RE GOING TO ASK FOR INPUT AND OPINION, AND THEY CAN USE THAT OR THEY CAN NOT, BUT THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO USE THAT FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES TO DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, BECAUSE IT'S AFTER THE ZONING CHANGES OCCURRED AND THE ZONING LAND USE HAS BEEN DECIDED FOR THAT PROPERTY AND THE WHOLE SET OF LAND USES THAT COME WITH IT, AND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN HAS BEEN APPROVED. THIS IS NOT A THIS IS NOT A CHANGE IN WHICH WE'RE SELECTING FROM A SUITE OF OPTIONS. THIS IS A CHANGE THAT A DEVELOPER OR PROPERTY OWNER HAS SAID. THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE THIS MAKES SENSE FOR OUR OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY. OUR USE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE ZONE HAS ALREADY BEEN CHANGED. AND SO THE PURPOSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IS NOT TO GARNER FEEDBACK AND INPUT ON WHAT TO DO THERE. IT'S TO INFORM. THANK YOU. SO OKAY, I NEED TO THINK MORE. THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR. READ. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I MIGHT ALSO STATE THAT US AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THE NEIGHBORS, THE RESIDENTS MAY NOT HAVE ANY FINAL SAY OVER REALLY WHAT THE DEVELOPER DOES, BUT THERE MAY BE A SITUATION WHERE THE DEVELOPER LISTENS TO THE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, LISTENS TO THE NEIGHBORS, AND DECIDES, HEY, MAYBE IN AN EFFORT TO BE A BETTER PUBLIC NEIGHBOR, YOU KNOW, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM TO BE RECEIVED BETTER, WE'RE GOING TO LISTEN TO THEM AND MAYBE WE'LL MAKE THE CHANGE INSTEAD FROM 10% TO 5% AND TO BE SOME COMPROMISE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AGAIN, I HATE TO, YOU KNOW, SOUND LIKE A BROKEN RECORD HERE, BUT I JUST THINK THE MORE WE COMMUNICATE, THE BETTER. AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, NOT TO AGAIN, NOT TO BE A BE A BROKEN RECORD HERE, BUT THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS THAT WE CAN DO TO STREAMLINE THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. AND I'VE GOT SOME REALLY GOOD IDEAS ACTUALLY. BUT BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I THINK TO OVERCOMMUNICATE IS BETTER. AND THE REASON WHY I'M SAYING THIS IS BECAUSE I'VE HAD EXPERIENCES WITH THIS WITH OVER THE PAST EIGHT YEARS, WHERE ACTUALLY, IN ONE PARTICULAR CASE WAS PLANNING A DESIGN WHERE THEY HAD A PUBLIC MEETING AND IT WAS NOT REALLY NECESSARILY DUE TO A ZONING CHANGE, BUT A COUPLE OF HUNDRED PEOPLE SHOWED UP. AND THIS THIS WAS CHANGES TO A TO A ROAD. AND THEY LISTENED AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO LISTEN, BUT THEY DID. SO THERE'S EVERY BIT THAT THAT POSSIBILITY THAT A DEVELOPER WOULD LISTEN. SO AGAIN I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO MAKE TWO QUICK THINGS. I, I'M GOING TO LOOK TO TRY TO FIND A GRAPH THAT I WAS SHOWN SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO THAT SHOWS THE DEVELOPMENT TIME FN LOUISVILLE COMPARED TO OUR COMPETING CITIES, OUR PEER CITIES. AND I JUST CAN TELL YOU THAT LOUISVILLE WAS AT THE TOP WITH A LINE ABOUT THIS LONG.

[00:55:03]

MAYBE GREENSBOROUGH AND ONE OTHER OR A LITTLE BIT SHORTER, BUT LESS THAN THIS. EVERYONE ELSE WAS WAY OVER HERE ON THIS SIDE. AND SO THAT PICTURE SHOWING HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET SOMETHING DONE HERE COMPARED TO EVERYWHERE ELSE, REALLY STUCK WITH ME. AND WE'VE GOT TO FIX THAT. AND WHILE I DO THINK THERE'S LOTS OF THINGS THAT WE CAN DO AND WE'RE WORKING ON THOSE THINGS, THIS IS PART OF THE PROBLEM AND IT'S REALLY PART OF THE PROBLEM WHEN WE IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO COMMUNICATE TO OUR CONSTITUENTS THAT THERE ARE CHECK BOXES THAT THE STAFF AND THAT THE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PROFESSIONALS OF THIS, IF THE CHECKS THAT BOX AND CHECKS THIS BOX AND IT CHECKS THIS BOX, THEY'RE GOING TO APPROVE IT BECAUSE THERE ARE NO FINDINGS OF FACT THAT WOULD OVERTURN IT. AND SO WHEN YOU HAVE MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO COME IN AND SPEAK, AND A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE SPEAKING AGAINST IT AND THEN EVERYTHING IS APPROVED ANYWAY BECAUSE ALL THE BOXES ARE CHECKED. THAT'S, IN MY OPINION, THE WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO, BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE TO OUR NEIGHBORS THAT IT'S LUCY AND THE FOOTBALL HERE. COME TALK ABOUT IT. COME TALK ABOUT HOW MUCH YOU HATE IT APPROVED BECAUSE IT MEETS ALL THE MEETS ALL THE CHECKS, ALL THE BOXES. AND SO FOR ME, THERE'S GOT TO BE AND TRAVIS, WE MY UNDERSTANDING IS CRS, THE CRS STATUTE REQUIRES A SINGLE PUBLIC MEETING IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. THAT'S THAT'S THE PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING. AND HOW MANY OPPORTUNITIES DO WE GENERALLY HAVE CURRENTLY IN LOUISVILLE FOR THE PUBLIC TO COME AND HAVE COMMENT? DO YOU MEAN ON A GIVEN CASE, ON A GIVEN, ON A GIVEN CASE, ON A GIVEN? SO IF IT'S A REZONING, THERE'S GOING TO BE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. THERE'S GOING TO BE LAND DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, WHICH SCHEDULES THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION. SO FOR A FULL REZONING CASE, THERE'S GOING TO BE THREE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOME LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT. SO WE HAVE THREE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOME LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT. THE STATUTE IS ONE, ALL OF OUR COMPETING COUNTIES HAVE ONE. SO WHEN EVERYONE TELLS YOU WHEN YOU'RE PLAYING GOLF WITH THEM, THAT OUR SURROUNDING COUNTIES ARE EATING OUR LUNCHES FOR DEVELOPMENT ON DEVELOPMENT ISSUES, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REFERRING TO. SO AGAIN, I FOR ME, CAN YOU REPEAT WHAT YOU JUST SAID. SO ANY OF SO THE STATUTE REQUIRES ONE PUBLIC MEETING. RIGHT. MOST OF THE SURROUNDING COUNTIES AROUND JEFFERSON COUNTY ARE REQUIRING ONE PUBLIC MEETING, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING OR PUBLIC MEETING. PUBLIC PUBLIC. SO WE ARE THE ONLY COUNTY THAT REQUIRES NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS, MAYBE. IT'S CERTAINLY A RARE THING. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL KNOW THAT TOP OF YOUR HEAD, BUT I KNOW IT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CRS. OURS ARE SPECIFIC TO US. WE ADD THEM VIA ORDINANCE, AND IT'S A VERY RARE OCCURRENCE ACROSS THE STATE. SO MY POINT IS THAT WE'RE ALREADY ALLOWING COMMUNITY INTERFACING WITH THESE PROJECTS MANY, MANY MORE TIMES THAN OUR SURROUNDING COUNTIES AND OTHER CITIES AROUND US. AND THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH THAT IS NOT THE INTERACTION. THE INTERACTION IS FINE, EXCEPT THAT IT LENGTHENS THAT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WAY OUT, BECAUSE GETTING THOSE THINGS SCHEDULED TO GET, YOU KNOW, A QUORUM OF PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OF THAT STUFF ADDS UP. IT ENDS UP MAKING OUR CHART GO WAY OUT TO HERE. SO I JUST AGAIN, I'M GOING TO BE VERY, VERY CAREFUL INFORMATION AND PEOPLE HAVING INFORMATION I THINK IS FANTASTIC. BUT PEOPLE BEING INVITED TO A FORUM WHERE THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE WEIGHING IN AND A LOT OF TIME THEY'RE WEIGHING IN UNHAPPILY AND THEN IT GETS APPROVED ANYWAY, BECAUSE ALL THE TEXTS ARE BEING ALL THE BOXES ARE BEING CHECKED, I THINK CREATES A FALSE SENSE OF INTERACTION THAT WE NEED TO BE VERY, VERY CAREFUL ABOUT. SO, COUNCILWOMAN RUTH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO THIS IS THIS WHOLE PROCESS IS COMPLICATED. IT TAKES A LONG TIME. THE CITIZENS ARE BEING ASKED TO WEIGH IN, AND THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE BEING IGNORED. WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION IN THE BIG PICTURE.

WE KNOW THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A WHOLE DIFFERENT WAY OF DOING THIS. AND IT FEELS LIKE RIGHT NOW WE'RE TINKERING AROUND THE EDGES. I UNDERSTAND THAT MAYBE THE WAY WE HAVE TO GO ON THIS.

SO I APPRECIATE THAT. THIS IS A VERY HARD PROCESS. I GOT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK TO MOVE THAT WE TABLE THIS FOR NOW SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SOME MORE CHANGES ON IT. SO CHECK. BEEN MOVED TO BE TABLED AND SECONDED. WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. THOSE AGAINST. NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT. SO THIS THIS ORDINANCE IS TABLED TO UNTIL THE NEXT UNTIL OUR NEXT

[01:00:10]

MEETING. IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS OR IS IT OVER? YEAH. YOU COULD ASK HIM ONE QUESTION. IS IT SOMETHING IS IT SOMETHING WE COULD TALK ABOUT AFTERWARDS, OR IS IT. WELL, I JUST I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OF WHATEVER POINT OF PRIVILEGE OR WHATEVER IS I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SAID AND I'LL TAKE THAT AS WE CONTINUE TO DISCUSS THIS. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE LONG THING, THE LONG TIMELINE PROJECT LINE, BUT I JUST, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALREADY THERE RIGHT NOW. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW ADDING THIS WOULD THAT'LL JUST MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT LONGER. BUT I IMAGINE THAT AND I DON'T KNOW. BUT I IMAGINE THERE'S A LOT OF LEGALITIES.

THERE'S A LOT MORE COMPLICATED THINGS IN THE PROCESS THAN JUST THROWING TOGETHER A PUBLIC MEETING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK I COULD PUT TOGETHER 1 IN 2 DAYS. I MEAN, POST IT, HAVE THE MEETING. YOU'RE DONE. HOW HARD CAN IT BE? YOU GOT TO FIND A PLACE TO RENT OR WHATEVER, BUT INFORMING THE PEOPLE, I DON'T THINK THAT IS WHAT'S CAUSING THE BIG LINE. IT'S THERE'S GOT TO BE MORE TO IT. AND I LOOK FORWARD ON LOOKING AT IT WITH A LOT CLOSER WITH YOU GUYS. THANK YOU.

OKAY. OUR NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS ITEM NUMBER. WHERE WHERE AM I? ITEM NUMBER FIVE AN ORDINANCE

[5. O-027-25 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE GUIDELINES FOR THE NULU REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT AS SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 162 IN THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES (“LMCO”). Action Required By: July 30, 2025 Sponsors: Markus Winkler (D-17) ]

AMENDING THE GUIDELINES FOR THE NEWLY REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT IS SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 162 OF IN THE LOUISVILLE METRO CODE OF ORDINANCES. MOTION. PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED. JOE, ARE YOU GOING TO BE TALKING TO THIS? YES. JOE HABERMAN, OFFICE OF PLANNING. SO IT IS HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE VIEW ON THIS PRESENTATION. IT'S OPEN TO SOME. WEBSITE. WHY DID IT GO TO THE OPENING? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, THAT WAS WEIRD. NOPE. WHY IS IT NOT OPENING I SO THAT'S ONE OF THE NICE POWERPOINT. OPEN. I DIDN'T SEE THAT. SORRY. WE'RE THERE. TOOK A SECOND. SO WHAT WE'RE PRESENTING TODAY IS THE NEWLY REVISED SORRY NULU REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT GUIDELINE UPDATE. SO SOME OF YOU MAY RECALL LATE LAST YEAR IN AUGUST, THE PLANNING OR THE METRO COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION ASKING THAT STAFF TAKE A LOOK AT THE GUIDELINES IN LIGHT OF SOME RECENTLY APPROVED PLANS BY METRO COUNCIL. SO THE TWO BIG ONES ARE PLAN 2040 AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN FOR THE BUTCHERTOWN, NULU AND PHOENIX HILL NEIGHBORHOODS. SO THE NULU GUIDELINES WERE ORIGINALLY ADOPTED IN 2015. SO THEY'RE NOT PARTICULARLY OLD. IT'S ACTUALLY OUR NEWEST DESIGN OVERLAY DISTRICT. BUT THOSE TWO PLANS ANTICIPATED SOME CHANGES. AND THE GUIDELINES DIDN'T REALLY LINE UP WITH EVERYTHING IN THOSE PLANS. AND THEY DIDN'T LINE UP WITH THINGS IN ZONING. SO WHAT WE DID IS WE TOOK A LOOK AT THE ZONING REGULATIONS THAT ARE IN PLAY IN THOSE DISTRICTS, AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS, AND MADE SOME TARGETED UPDATES. SO VIRTUALLY ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE ARE LINED UP WITH THOSE TWO DOCUMENTS ARE BRINGING MORE ALIGNMENT INTO ZONING, SO THERE'S LESS CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN THOSE DOCUMENTS. SO WHAT ARE THE DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT AREN'T FAMILIAR? THEY'RE NOT ZONING. THESE LIVE OUTSIDE THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THEY'RE FOUND IN METRO CODE. AND THEY BASICALLY ARE INTENDED TO SUPPLEMENT THE ZONING CODE IN TERMS OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AND URBAN DESIGN. SO THEY'RE THEY'RE BASICALLY DESIGNED IN THEIR ORIENTATION. THEY DON'T GET INTO USE. THAT WOULD BE STILL THE PURVIEW OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO DICTATE WHAT TYPES OF BUSINESSES, WHAT TYPES OF LAND USES SHOULD LOCATE ON A SITE, BUT THEY PROVIDE A PROCESS TO REVIEW ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS AND SITE PLANS FOR THESE DESIGN FEATURES. AND THERE'S THRESHOLDS IN TERMS OF PUBLIC COMMENT. SO CERTAIN PROJECTS GO TO A COMMITTEE. IN THIS CASE IT'S THE NULU REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT COMMITTEE. WE CALL IT NROD. SOME PEOPLE CALL IT THE NULU COMMITTEE. IT'S GOT MANY NAMES, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AREN'T REALLY TO DISCOURAGE ANY PARTICULAR TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.

[01:05:05]

THIS IS STRAIGHT ALMOST OUT OF THE ORDINANCE OR TELL YOU TO DO A PARTICULAR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OR STYLE. IT'S JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME BROAD PARAMETERS TO FALL UNDER IN TERMS OF HOW THE BUILDING IS DESIGNED AND HOW THE SITE IS DEVELOPED. AND I'LL NOTE THAT THE GUIDELINES AREN'T NECESSARILY MANDATORY. THERE IS A PROCESS FOR RELIEF. SO AS WE GO THROUGH THESE, THERE'S SOME GUIDELINES THAT HAVE A SHELL, SOME THAT HAVE A SHOULD. THE SHOULDS ARE GENERALLY SHOULDS.

YOU YOU SHOULD DO IT IN PARTICULAR CONTEXTS. BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO REQUIRE IT. A SHALL YOU SHOULD DO IN EVERY CASE. AND IF YOU CAN'T DO IT, YOU HAVE TO KIND OF EXPLAIN WHY YOU CAN'T MEET IT. AND I'LL GET INTO THAT IN A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO HELP PEOPLE THROUGH THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL THE ORDINANCE SAYS ON THAT MATTER NOW. AND THE GUIDELINES ARE ORGANIZED. AND THERE'S IT VARIES A LITTLE BIT BETWEEN THE THREE DESIGN OVERLAY DISTRICTS, BUT THEY'RE GENERALLY UNDER SIGNAGE, BUILDING PUBLIC ART, SITE PLANNING AND PARKING, HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND SUSTAINABILITY. AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS FOR THIS NULU DISTRICT. SO HERE'S THE MAP. SO WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS, IT'S BORDERED BY MAIN STREET TO THE NORTH, WITH BAXTER TO THE EAST AND LIBERTY TO THE SOUTH AND HANCOCK TO THE WEST. SO THAT'S OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT A PERFECT RECTANGLE. SO THERE'S SOME DEVIATIONS TO THAT, BUT THAT'S THE GENERAL AREA. WHY IT STOPS AT MAIN STREET IS TO THE NORTH OF MAIN STREETS, THE BUTCHERTOWN LOCAL PRESERVATION DISTRICT. SO THAT ALREADY HAS SOME DESIGN CONTROLS IN PLACE THROUGH A LOCAL PRESERVATION ORDINANCE. TO THE WEST IS THE DOWNTOWN FORM OR NOT THE DOWNTOWN FORM, THE DOWNTOWN OVERLAY. SO THAT HAS ITS OWN SET OF REQUIREMENTS. AND TO THE SOUTH IS PART OF THE LIBERTY GREEN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. SO THAT HAS SOME ADDITIONAL DESIGN PROTECTIONS. SO THOSE KIND OF ARE WHY IT STOPPED WHERE IT STOPPED. SO WITH THAT, WHAT WE DID FOR ENGAGEMENT, WE HAD COUNCIL GAVE US, I BELIEVE 90 OR 120 DAYS TO GET THESE RECOMMENDATIONS RETURNED. SO WE DID HAVE A LIMITED TIME IN TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT, BUT WE GOT A LOT DONE. FIRST, WE REVIEWED THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. A LOT OF ENGAGEMENT WENT INTO THAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THE PROCESS TOOK START TO FINISH, BUT IT WAS CERTAINLY OVER A YEAR AND A LOT OF ENGAGEMENT, A LOT OF MEETINGS, AND WE REVIEWED THAT PLAN AND MADE SURE THAT THE IDEAS AND SUGGESTIONS BY THE PUBLIC ARE REFLECTED INTO THIS RECOMMENDATION PROCESS. WE MET WITH A LOT OF WHAT WE LOOSELY WOULD IDENTIFY AS STAKEHOLDERS. SO DEVELOPERS WHO HAVE BEEN GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS IN THE DISTRICT RECENTLY THAT HAD SOME FEEDBACK THAT THEY COULD GIVE US ABOUT WHAT WHAT'S WORKING, WHAT ISN'T. WE MET WITH THEM. WE MET WITH DESIGN PROFESSIONALS BECAUSE THESE ARE ARCHITECTURAL IN A LOT OF WAYS, AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT ARCHITECTS AND PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY DRAW THE DESIGNS UNDERSTOOD THEM AND SAID WHETHER THEY WOULD WORK OR NOT WORK. WE MET WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS, INCLUDING FOLKS FROM THE BUTCHERTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AS WELL AS THE PHOENIX HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND SOME OTHER FOLKS THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN ATTENDING THE MEETINGS TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE PROCESS IS WORKING AND NOT WORKING. AND THEN WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING, AND THIS ONE WE DID IN THE DISTRICT. SO WE DIDN'T HAVE A DOWNTOWN. WE HAD IT AT THE AC HOTEL ON A SATURDAY, AND WE GOT PRETTY GOOD ATTENDANCE AT THAT.

AND CONSIDERING SOME OF THESE MEETINGS, WE DON'T GET A LOT OF PEOPLE, BUT WE HAD AROUND 25 TO 30 PEOPLE THERE, AND WE HAD A LOT OF WE DIDN'T DO A TALK AT YOU MEETING. WE DID MORE OF A WORKING MEETING WHERE WE HAD A LOT OF STAFF THERE TO KIND OF HAVE ONE ON ONE DISCUSSIONS WITH PEOPLE TO HEAR WHAT THEY WERE THINKING SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WASN'T JUST A PRESENTATION AND A Q&A AT THE END. AND WE HAD SOME EXERCISES, AND I'LL SHARE ONE WITH YOU TO KIND OF GET THEIR FEEDBACK, BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO GET THE REGULAR PERSON'S MINDS WRAPPED AROUND DESIGN. THEY KNOW WHAT THEY LIKE, BUT THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY IT. SO WE TRY TO HAVE SOME EXERCISES TO HELP THEM, YOU KNOW, GIVE US SOME FEEDBACK THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY USE RATHER THAN A COMMENT FORM THAT SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THEY MISS THE MARK IN TERMS OF GIVING US STUFF THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY USE IN THIS PROCESS. WE ALSO CREATED A WEB PAGE AND HAD A COMMENT FORM AND GOT ABOUT 18 COMMENTS THROUGH THAT. SO PEOPLE THAT, YOU KNOW, DIDN'T HAVE THE TIME TO COME TO THE COMMUNITY MEETING COULD STILL GET THEIR THOUGHTS IN. AND THEN FINALLY, FOR THE COMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE HAS TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION VERY SIMILAR TO WHEN WE CHANGED THE ZONING CODE. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION. COUNCIL TAKES ACTION. IT'S VIRTUALLY THE SAME PROCESS. SUBSTITUTE THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE NULU COMMITTEE, WHICH ARE ALL APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR AND AFFIRMED BY COUNCIL. SO THESE ARE CITIZENS THAT HAVE BEEN

[01:10:01]

SELECTED TO SERVE ON THIS COMMITTEE, AND THEY ACT ON MANY OF THE OVERLAY PERMITS. WE HAD FIVE MEETINGS. WE SLOWLY WENT THROUGH IT LINE BY LINE. I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT TODAY. I'M GOING TO KEEP IT HIGH LEVEL. BUT WE WENT THROUGH IT LINE BY LINE, AND AT THE END OF EACH OF THOSE MEETINGS, WE GAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT FORM. SO THE PUBLIC HAD A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS, EVEN THOUGH WE HAD A SHORT WINDOW TO GET THIS RECOMMENDATION BACK TO COUNCIL. SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THE OVERVIEW. I'LL GET INTO THIS IN A LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL, BUT WE DID DECIDE THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE THE GUIDELINES AND IMPROVE THE PROCESS. THE GUIDELINES RELATED TO BUILDING SITE PLANNING AND PARKING PRESERVATION AND SUSTAINABILITY. I'M NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING NEEDED SIGNIFICANT UPDATES OTHER THAN BUILDING, AND I'LL GET INTO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF THE MAIN EVENT. BUT THOSE NEEDED SOME STRENGTHENING FOR THE MOST PART, AND SOME REALIGNMENTS TO MATCH UP WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. THE GUIDELINES RELATED TO SIGNAGE AND PUBLIC ART. WE DID RECOMMEND SOME CHANGES, BUT THEY'RE NOT VERY MAJOR CHANGES IN OUR OPINION. SO WE TOUCHED EVERY SECTION TO UPDATE IT BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE IN THERE, WE'RE GOING TO POLISH IT AS MUCH AS WE CAN. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THOSE ANY FURTHER TODAY BECAUSE I THINK THE CHANGES WE'RE RECOMMENDING ARE FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD. THE BIG THING IS I SHOWED YOU THE DISTRICT BOUNDARY BEFORE. WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY CHANGES TO THE DISTRICT BOUNDARY AT THIS TIME. WE RECEIVED NO FEEDBACK FROM ANYONE SAYING THAT WE SHOULD EXPAND IT OR, YOU KNOW, CONTRACT IT. LIKE I SAID, YOU CAN'T REALLY GO TO THE NORTH BECAUSE OF THE BUTCHERTOWN LOCAL PRESERVATION DISTRICT. YOU CAN'T REALLY GO TO THE WEST BECAUSE OF THE DOWNTOWN OVERLAY ANYWAY. SO WE'RE PRETTY SET WHERE THAT IS AND THE MAIN ISSUES, AND I'LL TOUCH ON EACH OF THESE AS WE GO THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BUILDING HEIGHTS. THAT IS PROBABLY WHERE WE GOT VIRTUALLY THE MOST COMMENTS ABOUT. AND I'LL TOUCH ON THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. SURFACE PARKING. WE HAVE LOTS OF PLANS THAT TALK ABOUT SURFACE PARKING AND HOW TO APPROACH THAT MOVING FORWARD. SO THAT'S AN ISSUE. COMPATIBILITY WITH HISTORIC STRUCTURES, LARGER BUILDINGS, MIXED USE DESIGNS AND ALLOWING FOR MORE HOUSING. AND I WILL TOUCH ON EACH OF THESE AS I GET THROUGH THIS. SO FIRST, JUST THE STRUCTURE, THE ORDINANCE, THE GUIDELINES ARE AN APPENDIX, BUT THEY WERE ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE. SO WHEN I'M REFERRING TO ORDINANCE HERE, I'M REFERRING TO THE MAIN ORDINANCE, NOT THE GUIDELINES WHICH ARE AN APPENDIX. AND I'LL GET THROUGH THE GUIDELINES A LITTLE BIT PIECE BY PIECE. BUT THE ORDINANCE REALLY SETS THE PROCESS FOR. FOR THE GUIDELINES AND HOW YOU APPROACH AN APPLICATION AND HOW YOU REVIEW IT. BASICALLY A SUMMARY OF HOW YOU REVIEW AN OVERLAY. THERE'S THRESHOLDS TO WHAT YOU CAN JUST DO. YOU DON'T NEED ANY APPROVAL. THAT'S GENERALLY GENERAL MAINTENANCE. YOU KNOW, YOU'RE PAINTING A BUILDING, YOU'RE DOING UPKEEP. YOU DON'T NEED TO COME TO US FOR THAT. THEN THERE'S THINGS WE CAN DO AT STAFF LEVEL, AND THEN THERE'S THINGS THAT HAVE TO GO TO A COMMITTEE. THE COMMITTEE, THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE DOESN'T MEET A WHOLE LOT. SO MOST THINGS ARE YOU'RE ABLE TO DO EITHER JUST WITH A BUILDING PERMIT OR JUST ABLE TO DO OR WITH STAFF LEVEL. VERY FEW THINGS GO TO THE COMMITTEE. WE PROBABLY ONLY MEET AT MOST SIX TIMES A YEAR, AND WE USUALLY ONLY HAVE 1 TO 2 CASES PER AGENDA. SO THERE'S NOT A LOT OF COMMITTEE LEVEL APPROVALS. SO WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY CHANGES TO WHAT GOES TO THE COMMITTEE OR WHAT DOESN'T AT THIS TIME. AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY FEEDBACK TO THAT EFFECT. BUT ONE THING WE ARE RECOMMENDING IN TERMS OF PROCESS IS CURRENTLY, AND THIS TIES A LITTLE BIT INTO THE DISCUSSION ON THE PREVIOUS ITEM, IS THE CONCEPT OF A JOINT HEARING THAT SAVES, I THINK, EVERY ONE TIME STAFF, PUBLIC AND THE DEVELOPER APPLICANT. SO WHAT THAT IS, IS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. IF YOU NEED A VARIANCE OR YOU NEED A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL THAT HAS TO BE REVIEWED AT A COMMITTEE, A CATEGORY THREE, YOU CAN HAVE A SHARED JOINT PUBLIC HEARING. SO THERE'S EVERYBODY CAN ONLY SHOW UP TO ONE HEARING TO PROVIDE THE COMMENT. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO SHOW UP TO TWO MEETINGS OR POSSIBLY THREE MEETINGS. YOU CAN HAVE THAT PUBLIC HEARING AT ONE TIME, AND WE BRING A HEARING OFFICER FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT. IT IS OPTIONAL. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DO IT, BUT IT IS A NICE THING THAT CAN SAVE TIME ON TIMELINES. AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME DOWNTOWN 3 OR 4 TIMES. SO WE ARE SUGGESTING THAT THAT BE EXPANDED TO INCLUDE WAIVERS, I THINK WAIVERS AND VARIANCES OFTEN GET CONFUSED. A VARIANCE IS DIMENSIONAL. WAIVER IS SOMETHING ELSE. BUT WE BELIEVE

[01:15:01]

WAIVERS THAT RELATE TO DESIGN. THERE'S OTHER WAIVERS THAT RELATE TO THINGS LIKE PARKING.

THOSE SHOULD STAY WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THOSE SHOULD BE INCLUDED. I THINK THE INTENT WAS TO INCLUDE THOSE. SO WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT WE EXPAND THAT. AND THEN ANOTHER PROCESS RELATED THING IS WHAT I MENTIONED BEFORE IS NO GUIDELINE IS ABSOLUTELY MANDATORY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. YOU CAN SAY THIS DOESN'T WORK FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, BUT THERE'S NO STANDARDS. LIKE WHEN YOU GET A VARIANCE, THERE'S VERY CLEAR STANDARDS OF WHAT YOU HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE TO GET THAT RELIEF. RIGHT NOW, THE WORDING IS LITERALLY THAT YOU SHOW THAT YOU MEET THE GUIDELINES AS A WHOLE. IF YOU DON'T MEET ONE GUIDELINE, YOU'RE KIND OF ALREADY NOT HITTING THAT MARK. SO WHAT WE WANTED TO EXPLAIN IS IF YOU FAIL TO MEET A SHOW GUIDELINE THAT YOU DO SOMETHING TO MITIGATE THAT, AND THAT IS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE COMMITTEE TO DECIDE WHAT THAT IS. SO YOU'RE YOU'RE EXPLAINING WHY YOU CAN'T MEET IT AND WHAT YOU'RE WILLING TO DO FOR NOT MAKING THAT GUIDELINE, YOU KNOW, WORK. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO BIG PROCESS THINGS. AND THEN WE'RE ALSO JUST CLARIFYING TEMPORARY IMPROVEMENTS. THIS PROBABLY ISN'T THE BIGGEST DEAL TO COUNSEL, BUT IT DOES COME UP A LOT. THERE'S A LOT OF TEMPORARY THINGS, EVENTS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE JUST CLARIFY WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THE DISTRICT WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, TRIGGERING SOME KIND OF COMMITTEE REVIEW. SO BUILDING WAS REALLY THE BIG THING. AND I'M JUST GOING TO HIGHLIGHT, YOU KNOW, WHY REALLY QUICK. SO CURRENTLY THE THERE'S A CONFLICT A SIGNIFICANT CONFLICT BETWEEN WHAT THE ZONING ALLOWS. THE ZONING ALSO REGULATES HEIGHT AND THEN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATES HEIGHT. SO BUT THEY DON'T THEY DON'T LINE UP. SO BASICALLY AND I'LL SHOW YOU A MAP HERE IN A SECOND. BUT RIGHT NOW THERE'S THREE FORM DISTRICTS WITHIN THAT. THE OVERLAY DISTRICT BOUNDARIES. THOSE ARE THE DOWNTOWN FORM DISTRICT, THE TRADITIONAL MARKETPLACE CORRIDOR AND THE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEY ALL HAVE DIFFERENT HEIGHT ALLOWANCES UNDER ZONING. AND I'LL TOUCH ON THOSE WHEN I SHOW YOU THE MAP. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, THEY ARE ALL HIGHER THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED IN THE NULU DISTRICT, WHICH IS TYPICALLY THREE STORIES, BUT YOU CAN GO HIGHER IN CERTAIN CONTEXTS. IF YOU STEP BACK AND YOU DON'T OVERSHADOW ANOTHER BUILDING. SO WE HAVE THAT ISSUE.

WE HAVE THAT CONFLICT BECAUSE AND JUST KEEP IN MIND, DOWNTOWN, WHICH ISN'T A HUGE PART OF THE NULU DISTRICT, ALLOWS EFFECTIVELY AS TALL AS YOU CAN BUILD, IT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE A MAX HEIGHT TO IT. SO WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, FIGURE THAT OUT BECAUSE IT WAS CONFUSING PEOPLE.

WHICH ONE TRUMPS THE OTHER? WHICH ONE'S MORE IMPORTANT TO U? THEN WE HAVE A NEW FORM DISTRICT THAT'S CONTEMPLATED IN PLAN 2040 THAT WE'RE GOING TO CREATE CALLED THE URBAN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH ALSO ANTICIPATES A TALLER BUILDING. SO IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IT THEY REALLY TALKED ABOUT THIS NEW URBAN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE NEXT TO DOWNTOWN. AND WHILE IT DOESN'T HAVE A HEIGHT, IT'S GOING TO BE GREATER THAN THREE STORIES. AND THEY THEY SHOW THE AREA TO CONSIDER, NOT NECESSARILY WHERE TO MAP IT, BUT TO CONSIDER. IT'S VIRTUALLY THE WHOLE NULU DISTRICT, WITH ONE SMALL EXCEPTION IN THE CORNER.

SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO GO OVER THE WHOLE DISTRICT, BUT IT COULD, AND WE JUST NEED TO BE READY TO LINE THESE UP AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. AND PART OF THE REASON WHY THE NEW HEIGHT MIGHT BE NECESSARY IS I'LL GET TO IS THAT CAN ALLOW MORE HOUSING, MORE MIXED USES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT GENERALLY WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR HEIGHT IS, IS WE'RE PROPOSING IF YOU WE'RE TRYING TO LINE IT UP WITH THE ZONING A LITTLE BIT MORE, AND I WILL SAY IT'S STILL GOING TO BE MORE RESTRICTIVE IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, BUT MORE CONSISTENT BETWEEN THE TWO. SO THE FEEDBACK WE GOT, WE KIND OF LED TO THIS. IT'S SOMEWHAT OF A COMPROMISE BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE WANTED REALLY TALL, SOME PEOPLE WANTED TO KEEP IT THE SAME, BUT IS IF YOU'RE IN THE DOWNTOWN FORM, WHICH IS A SMALL PART OF THE DISTRICT, AND I HAVE A MAP TO SHOW YOU IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, IS EIGHT STORIES THE IF YOU'RE IN THE URBAN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH DOESN'T EXIST YET, IT WOULD BE SIX STORIES. AND IF YOU'RE IN ANY OF THOSE OTHER FORM DISTRICTS, IT'S FOUR STORIES. SO THE NET EFFECT OF THIS, IF YOU ADOPT THIS TODAY IS IT'S VIRTUALLY GOING TO BE FOUR STORIES FOR MOST 95 ISH PERCENT OF THE DISTRICTS. SO THERE'S NO REAL CHANGE UNTIL THE URBAN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT COMES INTO PLAY. SO THAT'S EFFECTIVELY A ONE STORY BUMP FROM MOST OF THE DISTRICT IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO AN ALLOWANCE.

IF YOU PROVIDE A STORY THAT IS MOSTLY STRUCTURED PARKING. THIS ADDRESSES, WE'RE TRYING TO GET RID OF SOME OF THE SURFACE PARKING ISSUES YOU CAN GET. IT'S AN INCENTIVE TO GET THAT ONE

[01:20:04]

EXTRA STORY. BUT I WILL NOTE THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE NECESSARILY WANT. THAT'S THE MAX. WE ALSO WE HAVE AN UNLIMITED HEIGHT DOWNTOWN, AND WE'RE NOT GETTING 8 TO 10 STORY BUILDINGS IN A LOT OF CONTEXT. SO THERE'S THAT'S JUST THE MAX THAT'S NOT THE PREFERRED HEIGHT.

AND THEN WE STILL HAVE A MINIMUM HEIGHT, WHICH WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THAT IS FOR THE DOWNTOWN AND URBAN CENTER MOVED UP FROM TWO STORIES TO THREE. AND IN THE OTHER FORM DISTRICT STAYS AT TWO. RIGHT NOW, I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF SINGLE STORY BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT. THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT MEETING THE STANDARDS, WHICH IS TWO STORIES, WHICH IS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. SO THAT IS THE HEIGHT. WE ALSO WANTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT LARGER BUILDINGS. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DISTRICT HISTORICALLY, IT WAS SEVERAL BUILDINGS PER BLOCK. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW. WE'RE SEEING PEOPLE CONSOLIDATE SEVERAL LOTS, SOMETIMES ENTIRE BLOCK FACES AND BUILDING LARGER BUILDINGS, AND THEY CAN LOOK OUT OF PLACE. WE CAN'T REALLY REGULATE THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE THAT YOU CAN ONLY HAVE SO MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE PER BUILDING, BUT WE CAN LOOK AT ITS APPEARANCE.

AND WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING IS GUIDELINES THAT HAVE STRONGER LANGUAGE IN TERMS OF VARIATION THAT YOU DO TO MAKE IT NOT LOOK SO BIG TRICKS THAT YOU CAN DO INSETS, ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, MORE ENTRANCES, WHICH IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO JUST SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE YOU GOT BLOCK LONG BUILDINGS, THAT THERE'S SOME BREAKS IN THOSE.

WE'RE ALSO ADDING SOME GUIDELINES RELATED TO PARKING GARAGES TO TERM PARKING GARAGE IS NOT MENTIONED ONCE IN THE EXISTING GUIDELINES. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DOWNTOWN OVERLAY IT IS SEVERAL. SO WE TOOK A LOT OF WHAT WAS IN THE DOWNTOWN AND MOVED IT OVER HERE BECAUSE WE'RE ANTICIPATING MORE PARKING GARAGES BEING BUILT IN THE DISTRICT. AND THINK OF THINGS LIKE THE AC HOTEL. THERE WAS REALLY NO GUIDELINES IN PLACE TO REVIEW HOW THAT PARKING GARAGE LOOKED. AND THEN FINALLY WE GOT A LITTLE BIT INTO APPROPRIATE MATERIALS. THE LANGUAGE WAS A LITTLE BIT VAGUE ABOUT WHAT TYPES OF MATERIALS WE WANTED TO SEE AND DIDN'T WANT TO SEE IN THE DISTRICT, AND WE ADDED SOME MORE DETAIL THERE. SO THESE ARE THE EXISTING BUILDING HEIGHTS, AND I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THIS IN A LOT OF DETAIL, BUT BASICALLY IT VARIES A LOT AND THERE'S A LOT OF VACANT LOTS. SO BUT GENERALLY RIGHT NOW WHAT YOU SEE IN THE DISTRICT IS BETWEEN 1 AND 6 STORIES, BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER APPROVALS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN BUILT YET. THAT ONE INCLUDES A TEN STORY BUILDING, ONE INCLUDES A SEVEN STORY BUILDING, THE SEVEN STORY IS THE JOE LAY SITE AND THE TEN STORIES TO SERVICE TANK SITES IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA. SO THERE ARE SOME APPROVALS ON THE BOOKS TO HAVE TALLER BUILDINGS IN THE REALM OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.

AND THERE'S, I SHOULD NOTE, A LOT OF OTHER APPROVALS THAT ARE IN THE FOUR STORY MARK, WHICH ARE SLIGHTLY TALLER. SO THESE ARE THE FORM DISTRICTS WHICH THIS MAP IS PROBABLY DIFFICULT TO READ, BUT THE RED IS THE TRADITIONAL MARKETPLACE, AND NULU IS KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE HERE. AND MOST OF THE DISTRICT IS TRADITIONAL MARKETPLACE CORRIDOR. THE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD IS PRETTY MUCH JUST SOUTH OF JEFFERSON, SO IT'S ONLY A SMALL PART OF THE DISTRICT.

AND THE DOWNTOWN JUST IS REALLY THAT EDGE IN THAT AREA WHERE JOE LAY IS ON THE ON THE KIND OF THE WESTERN FRINGE OF THE DISTRICT. SO IF YOU CAN SEE THE HATCH, THAT'S JUST THIS MAP IS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. I DID NOT CREATE THIS. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL ADOPTED WHERE IT SHOWS VIRTUALLY THE ENTIRE DISTRICT BEING JUST NOTED. TO TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE FORM DISTRICTS AND DECIDE IF THE URBAN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD IS RIGHT IN THOSE AREAS. AND THIS IS THE EXERCISE THAT WE DID FOR HEIGHT. SO THERE WAS A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT DIFFERENT HEIGHTS. I THINK EVERYBODY CAN HAVE AN OPINION ON WHAT SIZE BUILDING THEY'D LIKE TO SEE, BUT WHAT WE DID IS WE ASKED PEOPLE THAT PARTICIPATED AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING TO TAKE A STAR AND WHAT TYPES OF BUILDINGS THEY WERE OKAY WITH, SO YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO CHOOSE ONE. IF YOU WANTED TO SEE A MIX OF DIFFERENT BUILDING HEIGHTS, YOU COULD USE AS MANY STARS AS YOU WANT. BUT WHAT WE SAW IS MOST PEOPLE WERE OKAY WITH FOUR STORIES. AND THAT'S KEY, BECAUSE IF YOU KNOW, FOUR STORIES IS WHAT WE RECOMMENDED FOR THE NON DOWNTOWN AND URBAN CENTER FORMS, WHICH IS MOST OF THE DISTRICT AS IT IS TODAY. AND YOU SAW A LOT OF PEOPLE ALSO SUPPORTED SIX STORIES, WHICH IS THE URBAN CENTER. I DON'T ANTICIPATE THE DOWNTOWN FORM BEING EXPANDED WHICH WOULD ALLOW GREATER THAN THAT. SO THAT'S PRETTY MUCH GOING TO REMAIN THAT WESTERN PART OF THE DISTRICT. AND THIS IS THE ZONING. AND I ONLY AM SHOWING THIS IS THERE'S A HODGEPODGE OF ZONING IN THIS AREA. AND THAT'S WHY WE JUST WANT TO ENCOURAGE MIXED USE. BUT

[01:25:02]

MOST OF IT ALREADY ALLOWS MIXED USES. SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BUILDINGS ARE DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE MIXED USES, EVEN IF THE CURRENT USER DOESN'T WANT TO. THE NEXT USER MAY WANT TO HAVE THAT. AND WE ALSO ADDED SOME GUIDELINES THAT RELATE TO HAVING MORE ACTIVITY AT THE GROUND LEVEL, MORE STOREFRONTS, MORE THINGS HAPPENING. BASICALLY, THE IDEA IS MOST CASES NON RESIDENTIAL ON THE GROUND, RESIDENTIAL ABOVE, BUT IT'S NOT MANDATED. THAT'S JUST WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE FOR THE SITE GUIDELINES. SO WITH THIS BASICALLY THERE'S A LOT OF VACANT LOTS IN THE DISTRICT. I THINK WE DID A SURVEY AND WE COUNTED AROUND 90 VACANT LOTS, AND WE JUST THERE'S A LOT OF POTENTIAL FOR SURFACE PARKING. SO LOOKING AT PLAN 2040, LOOKING AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, I THINK WE WANT TO WALK BACK FROM ENCOURAGING SURFACE PARKING. THE OVERLAY DISTRICT CURRENTLY ALLOWS IT. BUT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO PROHIBIT IT IF THERE'S NOT A PRINCIPAL USE ON SITE. SO IF IT'S AN ACCESSORY PARKING AREA, IT'S FINE. BUT IF YOU JUST WANT TO BUILD A LOT, YOU DON'T MEET THE GUIDELINES AND YOU SHOULD HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHY THE GUIDELINES DON'T WORK FOR THAT PARTICULAR SITE. SO REMEMBER WHAT I SAID BEFORE THAT. NOW YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SHOW HOW YOU HIT ANOTHER GUIDELINE. IT BASICALLY PUTS THE ONUS ON THE DEVELOPER TO EXPLAIN WHY IT'S APPROPRIATE, RATHER THAN STAFF TO SAY WHY IT'S NOT SO. AND I'LL ALSO NOTE THAT WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT OVER PARKING IN TERMS OF SURFACE PARKING. AND SO IF YOU DO DO THE ACCESSORY LOT, WE ALSO ASK THAT YOU JUST MEET THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND NOT, YOU KNOW, DO THAT BLACK FRIDAY LOT WHERE YOU OVER PARK THE SITE THAT YOU JUST DO WHAT YOU NEED. AND THIS WILL TIE A LITTLE BIT IN TO THE SUSTAINABILITY. WE'RE TRYING TO GET RID OF THESE LARGE LOTS. WE WANT AN INTACT URBAN AREA PARKING LOTS KIND OF BREAK THAT UP. AND THERE'S ALREADY REQUIREMENTS THAT THOSE PARKING LOTS, IF POSBLE, SHOULD BE SCREENED, PUT BEHIND BUILDINGS IF POSSIBLE, AND ACCESSED OFF THE ALLEYS. BUT THERE'S SITUATIONS WHEREOU MIGHT NOT HAVE ALLEY ACCESS AND BUT THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE. AND THEN WE ALSO PUT SOME LANAGE IN THERE ABOUT PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. THIS IS A VERY ACTIVE NEIGHBORHOOD IN TERMS OF PEOPLE WALKING AROUND. SO WE WANTED THINGS LIKE CHANGES IN PAVEMENT.

WHEN YOU'RE CROSSING AN ACCESS DRIVE, WHETHER THAT'S PAVERS OR STRIPING OR WHATEVER. SO, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE IN AN AREA WHERE A VEHICLE MIGHT BE CROSSING. AND THEN WE GOT A LITTLE BIT INTO THE SCREENING AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN FINALLY, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT AS IT IS NOW. SO THINGS LIKE STREET TREES, BENCHES, FURNISHINGS, WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THAT PUBLIC REALM. SO WE TOOK A LOT OF WHAT WAS IN THE DOWNTOWN AND ADDED IT HERE. SO THAT SHOULD HELP THE EXPERIENCE OF PEOPLE WALKING AROUND WITH PRESERVATION. I'LL JUST NOTE THERE ARE THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS REALLY TO ACCOMMODATE BOTH NEW AND OLD. IT WANTS TO KEEP OLD BUILDINGS WHERE THEY CONTRIBUTE TO THE AREA. SOMETIMES AN OLDER BUILDING DOESN'T NECESSARILY DO THAT, AND IT MIGHT HAVE TO COME DOWN, AND IT WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT NEW BUILDINGS ARE KIND OF COMPATIBLE WITH THAT. SO WE WROTE SOME REGULATIONS OR NOT REGULATIONS, GUIDELINES THAT REALLY ADDRESS THAT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. SO WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT HEIGHT BEFORE, I WILL NOTE THAT IF YOU'RE RIGHT UP NEXT TO A HISTORIC BUILDING AND JUST BECAUSE WE SAID YOU CAN GO UP TO SIX STORIES DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THE COMMITTEE HAS TO APPROVE THAT HEIGHT IF THEY FEEL THAT IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE THAT'S NEXT DOOR, THEY CAN ASK FOR SOME STEP BACKS OR SOME OTHER CONCESSIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S MORE COMPATIBLE. THE OTHER THING I'LL NOTE IS THAT WE DROPPED THE AGE OF HISTORIC FROM 65 TO 50 YEARS. THIS JUST LINES IT UP WITH OTHER REGULATIONS AND LAWS, AND I'LL JUST ALSO NOTE THAT IF A BUILDING IS LOCALLY DESIGNATED, THE IT BECOMES THE PURVIEW OF THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION, NOT THE OVERLAY. SO IF THERE'S THAT CONFLICT, YOU JUST KIND OF DON'T REVIEW UNDER THE OVERLAY. SO THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF PROTECTION STILL REMAINS THE LOCAL DESIGNATION.

SO IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO DESIGNATE A BUILDING, THEY SHOULD AND IT WILL KIND OF CHANGE THE GUIDELINES THAT YOU REVIEW. THERE'S ALREADY A NUMBER OF BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT THAT ARE LOCALLY DESIGNATED, AND THEY ARE NOT UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE OVERLAY COMMITTEE, AND THEY NEED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE, NOT APPROPRIATENESS, NOT AN OVERLAY PERMIT. IF THEY HAVE THAT. SO AND THEN THE FINAL THINGS IS WE CLARIFIED THIS HAS BEEN A RUNNING CONDITION OF THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE, THAT IF YOU GET AN APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH A HISTORIC BUILDING, THAT YOU SHOULD WAIT ON THE DEMOLITION UNTIL YOU GET A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, THAT YOU SHOULDN'T JUST DEMOLISH IT, BECAUSE WE FOUND SOME PEOPLE WERE DEMOLISHING BUILDINGS AND THEN NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN. FOR YEARS. THAT WAS A CONCERN OF THE

[01:30:07]

COMMITTEE. AND THEN WE ALSO ADDED SOME LANGUAGE THAT IF YOUR BUILDINGS ON A NATIONAL REGISTER OR NOTED AS HAVING SOME SIGNIFICANCE, THAT YOU SHOULD TRY TO INCORPORATE THAT AND KEEP THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT HAVING THE SAME, YOU KNOW, RECOGNITION OF A LOCAL DESIGNATION. AND THEN WE ADDED SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT JUST HAVING BUILDINGS THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS KIND OF SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON AND IDENTIFY THOSE BUILDINGS.

AND THIS IS JUST THE HISTORIC MAP. SO SUSTAINABILITY NOT A LOT HERE, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT. WHAT WE DID ADD IS WE WANTED TO ENCOURAGE GREEN ROOFS, LIVING ROOFS, THINGS THAT HAPPEN AGAIN SOME G TTHA BACK. Y KKD THAT MIGHT BE MORE, YOU KNOW,G ADAPTABLE FOR STORMWATER OR BETTER FOR STORMWATER, AND THEN JUST REQUIRING MORE VEGETATION IN TERMS OF BUFFERING. WE'RE ALSO THIS IS JUST SOMETHING MORE TO NOTE, A REORGANIZATION. SO I GAVE YOU TWO DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONFUSING, BUT THE REASON FOR THAT IS ONE, I WANTED TO SHOW YOU THE DIRECT CHANGES BECAU TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE CHANGING. BUT THEN I DID A WHOLE STRIKETHROUGH AND A REORGANIZATION. WE JUST WANTED TO REORGANIZE THE GUIDELINES AND WHAT WE FELT WAS IMPORTANT. SO WE WANTED TO LEAD WITH BUILDINGS, NOT LEAD WITH SIGNAGE. SO THAT DOESN'T REALLY CHANGE ANYTHING IN A MAJOR WAY. IT'S JUST HELPS IN TERMS OF WHAT OUR PRIORITIES ARE. SO WITH THAT, THE COMMITTEE REVIEWED IT THOSE FIVE TIMES, AND IN DECEMBER THEY RECOMMENDED TO APPROVE IT. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS OF 6 TO 0 TO VOTE FOR COUNCIL TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. AND THEN TWO MEMBERS WERE ABSENT. AND WE HAD ONE VACANCY ON THAT BOARD AT THE TIME. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. JOE, I FIRST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU GUYS FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK, THAT THIS WAS A TON OF WORK AND FIVE PUBLIC MEETINGS, AND IT'S A GREAT IMPROVEMENT, AND I JUST APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT WAS PUT INTO THIS. THAT'S THE FIRST THING I WANT TO SAY. THE SECOND THING I WANTED TO SAY IS THIS IS THE EXACT APPROPRIATE INTERACTION WITH THE PUBLIC ON THE FRONT ENDS, CREATING GUIDELINES. THIS IS WHERE WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE MORE PUBLIC INTERACTION AS OPPOSED TO MORE ON THE BACK END FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. SO I'M REALLY PLEASED THAT YOU GUYS DID THAT.

AND IT SEEMED TO ME TO BE VERY SUCCESSFUL. I'VE GOT COUNCILMAN HUDSON. THANK YOU. CHAIR, I COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE. THIS THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE THE EFFORT NEEDS TO BE PUT IN AT THE FRONT FROM FROM AN ENGINEERING DESIGN PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S WHERE YOU HAVE TO WRITE THE SPECS, GET IT RIGHT, AND THEN START THE DEVELOPMENT OR DESIGN OF THE PROJECT. AND THE ENEMIES TO THAT SCHEDULE THAT THAT COUNCILMAN OWEN TALKED ABOUT. YOU KNOW, OUR ANALYSIS PARALYSIS AND, YOU KNOW, DESIGN BY COMMITTEE AND SCOPE CREEP AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE TAKE, ALL THE WORK THAT YOU JUST DID AND THROW IT IN THE TRASH AND SAY, ALL RIGHT, WELL, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT? AND THEN WE, WE, WE JUST IGNORE THE SPEC THAT YOU PUT ALL THAT WORK INTO TO GET IT DONE. AND WE HAVE TO SOMEHOW AND I REALIZE I'M SPEAKING IN NORMATIVE STATEMENTS AND NOT POSITIVE STATEMENTS, WHICH IS WEIRD FOR ME. BUT WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE CULTURE OF A CULTURE OF, ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO ASSUME DENIAL. AND YOU GOT TO PROVE ME THAT. PROVE TO ME WHY WE SHOULD APPROVE IT TO A CULTURE OF WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE IT UNLESS YOU SHOW ME A AN EGREGIOUS REASON WHY WE SHOULDN'T. AND IF YOU CHECK ALL THE BOXES IN THE SPEC, IT SHOULDN'T EVEN COME TO A COMMITTEE. WHERE WHERE THE WHERE THE SCOPE CREEP GETS. AND WE GET THAT LONG LINE FOR LOUISVILLE IS IN THE SCOPE CREEP. EVERY TIME YOU COME BACK WITH A CHANGE IN THE DESIGN, IT GOES TO A COMMITTEE. AND THE, THE EXAMPLE THAT THAT YOU MENTIONED A PERMIT TO DEMOLISH. IF I GOT A PERMIT TO DEMOLISH, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO FORWARD REGARDLESS BECAUSE THAT PERMIT WAS ISSUED TO ME FOR A REASON. IF SOMETHING HAPPENS UNRELATED TO THIS PROJECT THAT EXTENDS THAT, THAT PART OF THEOO THROUGH ANOTHER HOOP OF GETTING A BUILDING PERMIT AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS AND ANOTHER DESIGNED BY COMMITTEE. AND IT JUST IT JUST EXTENDS THE

[01:35:03]

SCHEDULE. AND I GUESS I'M JUST RANTING HERE A LITTLE BIT. I DON'T REALLY HAVE A QUESTION, BUT THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK. THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK THAT I COMPLETELY AGREE. THIS IS WHERE THE EFFORT NEEDS TO BE IS UP FRONT. DESIGN THE SPEC AND THEN EXECUTE TO THE SPEC. THANK YOU COUNCILMAN. BECKER. THANK YOU CHAIR, I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN HUDSON THERE AND COUNCILMAN OWEN, THE MINE'S A LITTLE OFF, RIGHT? I THINK THE QUESTION IS, HOW DO WE DO THIS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY OUTSIDE OF THE WATTERSON AND NOT PARTICULARLY FOCUSED ON JUST DOWNTOWN OR THE NULU OR BUTCHERTOWN OR PARIS TOWN, SO ON AND SO FORTH. WHEN WE HAVE A CRAVING FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH, AND IN THE SOUTH END ESPECIALLY, HOW DO WE GO ABOUT THIS PROCESS TO DO SOMETHING OF THIS MAGNITUDE, TO SPUR THAT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROWTH THAT WE NEED AND WANT AND CRAVE AS OUR CITY CONTINUES TO GROW AND THE OPPORTUNITY IS THERE, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO HONE IN ON THAT FOCUS? SO WHAT THIS ORDINANCE IS INTENDED TO DO IS BASICALLY PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR HOW THINGS WILL LOOK. IF YOU ARE ONLY INTERESTED IN DOING THAT IN ANOTHER PART OF THE CITY, THEN YOU COULD CRAFT ANOTHER OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT DOES THAT. IT DOESN'T THE WAY IT'S LOCATED IN METRO CODE, IT DOESN'T REGULATE USE OR WHAT YOU CAN DO ON A PROPERTY, THE DENSITY OF A PROPERTY, JUST THE WAY IT VISUALLY APPEARS. SO YOU CAN DO THAT IN ANY, YOU KNOW, PART OF METRO. THE ISSUE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER, THOUGH, IS DO YOU JUST WANT TO PROVIDE THE REQUIREMENTS, OR DO YOU WANT SOME KIND OF ADDITIONAL THRESHOLDS FOR REVIEW. SO OUR THREE DESIGN OVERLAYS ALL HAVE THREE SEPARATE COMMITTEES. AND WE STAFF THEM. AND THEY ALL HAVE PROJECTS THAT GO TO COMMITTEE PROJECTS THAT CAN BE REVIEWED AT STAFF. AND THEN LIKE I SAID BEFORE, THINGS THAT YOU CAN JUST DO, YOU WOULD KIND OF HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER YOU WANTED TO CREATE ADDITIONAL COMMITTEES, BECAUSE THAT CAN BE A BURDEN THAT COULD ADD TO THE PROCESS. IT COULD ADD TO TIMELINES. IT DOES IN THESE THREE OVERLAY DISTRICTS. BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT METRO COUNCIL WANTED TO SEE. IS THESE ADDITIONAL DESIGN PROTECTIONS. SO YOU COULD DO IT THROUGH AN ORDINANCE AND IDENTIFY THAT AREA. BUT YOU WOULD NEED TO THINK THROUGH WHAT TYPES OF THINGS DO YOU WANT TO HAVE TO GO TO A COMMITTEE? IF YOU EVEN WANT A COMMITTEE FOR THOSE AREAS THAT YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT. JOE, CAN YOU REMIND US WHAT THOSE DISTRICTS ARE? THE THERE'S FOUR OVERLAY DISTRICTS IN METRO CODE, BUT ONE OF THEM IS NOT UNDER THE OFFICE OF PLANNING. IT'S KIND OF MANAGEMENT, IF YOU WILL. AND THAT'S THE WATERFRONT. SO THAT ONE'S MORE THAN JUST DESIGN. IT ALSO PERTAINS TO HOW THINGS OCCUR IN THE WATERFRONT. BUT THEN THERE'S BARDSTOWN, BAXTER AVENUE. SO THAT'S ONE THAT GOES DOWN TO BAXTER AVENUE, BARDSTOWN ROAD CORRIDOR. IT'S VERY LINEAR.

THERE'S THE DOWNTOWN, WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. AND THEN THERE'S THIS NULU DISTRICT. THOSE ARE THE THREE DESIGN ONES THAT ARE UNDER OUR OFFICE FOR MANAGEMENT. THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND THANK YOU, JOE, FOR A VERY GOOD PRESENTATION. DO WE HAVE A COPY OF THIS OR CAN YOU GIVE US A COPY OF THIS, THE PRESENTATION? YES. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ONE YET, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY EMAIL IT TO EVERYBODY. WOULD YOU PLEASE. YEAH. THANK YOU. THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE, IT'S GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD AND MAYBE I MAYBE JUST ME THAT'S UNDERSTANDING IT THIS WAY. THE MAYOR'S MADE VERY CLEAR THAT HE WANTS TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ALL PARTS OF THE CITY. IS IT TRUE THAT NULU EXCLUDES THAT OPPORTUNITY, AND IF SO, WHY? SO? I WOULDN'T SAY IT EXCLUDES THE HOUSING. WHETHER HOUSING IS ALLOWED OR NOT IS GOING TO BE DICTATED BY THE ZONING. AND FOR THE MOST PART, NULU HAS A LOT OF EASY ONE, WHICH CAN BE CHALLENGING FOR HOUSING. SO THAT MIGHT BE WHERE THAT KIND OF THOUGHT PROCESS MIGHT BE COMING INTO PLAY. BUT IN GENERAL, FOR THE MOST PART, HOUSING IS ALLOWED. WE'VE APPROVED A NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS AS OF LATE IN THE DISTRICT, AND IT'S USUALLY UP TO THE DEVELOPER WHETHER OR NOT TO MAKE THAT AFFORDABLE. SO I DON'T KNOW OF ANY BARRIERS BASED ON THE ZONING, BUT I CAN SAY THE OVERLAY DISTRICT DOESN'T TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT BECAUSE THAT'S USE IT JUST IF YOU'RE RESIDENTIAL, YOUR RESIDENTIAL IN THE EYES OF THE DESIGN OVERLAY DISTRICT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT? OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN HUDSON. YEAH. THANK

[01:40:04]

YOU. CHAIR. SOMETHING THAT COUNCILMAN BATSON SAID KIND OF TRIGGERED A POINT FOR ME. SO WE'VE GOT ALL THESE OVERLAYS, AND IT'S ALMOST LIKE TAXES. THEY NEVER GO THE OTHER DIRECTION.

WHAT IS THE VEHICLE TO RESCIND AN OVERLAY OR TO REMOVE AN OVERLAY FROM AN AREA? I THINK IT WOULD BE THE ACT OF COUNCIL THROUGH AN ORDINANCE. BUT TRAVIS COULD CORRECT ME. YES. SO BECAUSE THE OVERLAYS ARE NOT WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, A METRO CREATION. SO THEY'RE NOT THEY WOULDN'T UNDERGO THAT PROCESS OF SORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND THE LIKE. IT WOULD JUST BE A FULL RETENTION OF THE OF THE ORDINANCE BY COUNCIL. IF YOU WANTED TO DELETE IT ENTIRELY, YOU WOULD JUST DELETE ALL THE CODE AND THE COMMITTEE WOULD EFFECTIVELY DISSOLVE THAT WAY. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE QUEUE. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COUNCILMAN BRADSHAW, I NEED TO LEARN HOW TO USE THE WEBSITE. IS DID THE OVERLAYS DO THEY DELAY PRODUCTION DEVELOPMENTS BECAUSE OF THE EXTRA STEPS? IT IS AN EXTRA STEP. SO IT ADDS POTENTIALLY TO THE TIMELINE. BUT IN A LOT OF WAYS THAT'S SOMEWHAT UP TO THE DEVELOPER. WE DO ALLOW FOR THE JOINT HEARINGS AND YOU CAN DO AN OVERLAY REVIEW CONCURRENTLY WITH THE ZONING REVIEW. IT'S NOT THIS IS STEP ONE. YOUR ZONING APPROVALS ARE STEP TWO. SO BY ORDINANCE, BY PROCESS, BY REQUIRED PROCESS, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY ADD ANY TIME. IF YOU DO THE PROCESS CONCURRENTLY WITH WHATEVER APPROVALS YOU NEED. BUT IF YOU JUST NEED THE OVERLAY PERMIT, THERE IS TIME. A STAFF LEVEL REVIEW MIGHT TAKE A COUPLE WEEKS TO GET DONE. IF IT'S A PROPER APPLICATION, AND A COMMITTEE COULD TAKE A MONTH OR MORE, DEPENDING ON, YOU KNOW, HOW COMPLEX THE PROJECT IS, BUT GENERALLY IT DOESN'T ADD THAT MUCH TIME TO THE PROCESS. AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY FEEDBACK FROM THE DEVELOPERS. WE MET WITH ABOUT THIS BEING AN ISSUE WITH THIS PARTICULAR DISTRICT. IT'S AN EXTRA LEVEL OF APPROVAL, RIGHT? IS THAT IT'S AN EXTRA APPROVAL? YES. ONE MORE STEP IN THE PROCESS EFFECTIVELY. BUT AGAIN, YOU CAN DO IT CONCURRENTLY WITH THOSE OTHER STEPS, WHICH IS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO MENTION. AND I'M GOING TO ASK A MR. OBVIOUS QUESTION. JUST KIND OF YOUR OPINION. THESE OVERLAYS WERE CREATED TO PRESERVE HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURE AND WHATNOT. IS THAT GENERALLY WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER THE OVERLAYS IF YOU HAD TO? I WON'T HOLD YOU TO IT. JUST YOUR OPINION. OH, IT'S A PURPOSE OF THEM FOR SURE TO PROTECT HISTORIC THAT THE MAIN THING I THINK THE MAIN INTEREST OF THE GUY THEY'RE NOT A HISTORIC DISTRICT. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. THE GUIDELINES ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. SO IT'S NOT THE SAME LEVEL AS, SAY, WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE IN OLD LOUISVILLE OR CLIFTON OR BUTCHERTOWN. YOU KNOW, OUR LOCAL PRESERVATION DISTRICTS, BUT IT'S MORE INTENDED TO GUIDE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE WANTED TO SEE IN TERMS WHOSE DESIGN, WHO'S WE. ULTIMATELY, COUNCIL ADOPTED IT, AND THEN THEY PUT IT INTO THE HANDS OF THE COMMITTEE TO KIND OF REVIEW AND MONITOR THE GUIDELINES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONS CONCERNS OKAY WITH THAT. OH COUNCILMEMBER. SORRY. WOULD IT BE EGREGIOUS AS A TO MOTION TO TABLE THIS TO REVIEW IT UNDER, YOU KNOW, JUST A GOOD MICROSCOPE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT ADDING EXTRA LAYERS. GIVEN THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU SPENT YOU KNOW, HOW TO GET IT DONE WITHIN 120 DAYS. AND THAT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED THAT YOU'VE DONE SO MUCH IN THAT SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT MISSING ANYTHING AS WELL AS UNDERSTANDING THE FULL SCOPE OF THIS. I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, BUT TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, YOU KNOW, MOVE FORWARD IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. SO I WOULD I WOULD JUST HAVE A COMMENT. WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION A LITTLE BIT UP HERE.

THE WAY THESE OVERLAY DISTRICTS WORK, GENERALLY SPEAKING, IS THEY COME FROM THE BOTTOM UP. SO A THE BARDSTOWN ROAD BAXTER OVERLAY DISTRICT WAS NOT A TOP DOWN THING. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS REQUESTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ALONG THERE THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER THEN TOOK UP THE COUNCIL AND GOT PASSED. SO THE ONLY THING I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT I WOULD SAY

[01:45:03]

WE NEED TO WATCH AGAINST IS THESE THE PROCESS THAT WE JUST HEARD HIM GO THROUGH SEEMED TO ME TO BE VERY MUCH BOTTOM UP. AND SO WHILE A LOT OF WHAT THEY NOT A LOT WHILE SOME OF WHAT THEY'VE ADOPTED WITHIN THIS I DON'T KNOW RIGHT. I WOULD GO TALLER, I WOULD GO MORE DENSE.

BUT BECAUSE IT CAME UP FROM THE BOTTOM TO ME, I'M OKAY WITH IT BECAUSE OF THAT, RIGHT? BECAUSE WHO AM I TO SAY THAT THEY THEY SHOULD DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH THEIR OVERLAY DISTRICT BASICALLY. SO I JUST WANT TO CAUTION AGAINST IF WE WANT TO REVIEW IT, IF WE WANT TO LOOK AT IT, GREAT. THAT'S OUR RIGHT TO DO SO. I JUST WANT TO CAUTION YOU BECAUSE I DO THINK THESE THINGS ARE VERY MUCH BOTTOM UP. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T LIKE, SAY, WELL, I DON'T LIKE WHAT YOU DECIDED TO DO THIS. LIKE ME SAYING, I THINK THIS IS A 15 STORY. SO LET'S LET'S CHANGE THAT. SO THAT'S ALL FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE FOR US TO REVIEW IN A LITTLE BIT MORE, GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO DIGEST IT, AND NOT NECESSARILY MAKE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES OR CHANGES AT ALL. JUST A GOOD TIME TO MAKE THE MOTION TO TAKE JUST FOR REVIEW. SO IS THAT AN AMENDMENT TO TABLE? I MAKE THE AMENDMENT TO TABLE I'LL SECOND. SO WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO TABLE THIS. AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, JO, I PROMISE YOU DON'T HAVE TO REITERATE IT NEXT TIME. ALL THOSE AGAINST NAY, NAY.

MAYBE WE SHOULD DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE JUST TO.

COUNCIL MEMBER LEE. YES. COUNCILMEMBER. BREAKFAST. YES. THE FOUR YEARS WERE NOT. SO THIS WILL BE TABLED UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS

[6. R-013-25 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW THE LOUISVILLE METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. Action Required By July 30, 2025 Sponsors: Khalil Batshon (R-25) ]

ITEM NUMBER SIX, A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW THE LOUISVILLE METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS MOTION.

PROPER. MOTION BEEN SECONDED. THIS WAS BROUGHT ABOUT, I BELIEVE, SPONSORED BY COUNCILMAN JOHN. SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS? YEAH. THANK YOU. SO WHAT WE HAVE DONE HERE IS WE HAVE TALKED TO SOME OF THE INTERESTED STAKEHOLDERS, BUT WE HAVE NOTICED THAT IN THE DEFINITIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THAT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS DO NOT SPECIFY WHETHER IT'S ANY TYPE OF PREDATORY LENDING OR A BANK. AND TO WHEN ZONING CASES COME UP IN OUR PROSPECTIVE DISTRICTS, THE RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS, THAT IF WE ARE LOOKING TO ADD A BINDING ELEMENT SAYING WE DON'T WANT CHECK CASHING PLACES LIKE WE CAN DO FOR WE WOULD RATHER NOT HAVE A LIQUOR STORE IN THIS AREA OR ADULT ENTERTAINMENT, OR WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT FOR PREDATORY LENDING. AND WE WERE BASICALLY LOOKING FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO SEE ABOUT SEPARATING OR CREATING A NEW DEFINITION FOR THAT UNDER LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO WE CAN NOT GET INTO THE MIX OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WHERE A BANK COULD GO OR AN ATM FOR RESPECTED BANK VERSUS CHECK CASHING ADVANCE PLACE OF THAT SORT. COULD I ASK THE TRAVIS? I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO HERE. I JUST WANT IS HOPING TO MAYBE GET A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE ON WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE WITHIN THE CONFINES OF CONSTITUTIONALITY AND SOME OTHER, MAYBE LEGAL QUESTIONS. AND IF THAT COULD YOU MAYBE GIVE US A LITTLE BIT ON THAT? SURE. AND ADMITTEDLY, AT THE OUTSET, I'LL SAY I HAVEN'T DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MICRO RESEARCH ON THIS TOPIC SPECIFICALLY. IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STAFF DOES, FRANKLY, QUITE WELL IS LOOK AT OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND SEE, YOU KNOW, ARE OTHER PLACES IN KENTUCKY AROUND THE COUNTRY ATTEMPTING TO REGULATE THESE DIFFERENTLY? HOW DO THEY MANAGE TO DO SO? OR HAVE THEY NOT SUCCEEDED IN DOING SO? SO BUT, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS IT'S A RESOLUTION TO SORT OF INVESTIGATE THAT ISSUE, THERE'S NO PROBLEMS ON THAT FRONT. I HAVE ALREADY HAD A SORT OF A REQUEST AT DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS LAST WEEK TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE RESEARCH ON THIS TOPIC, AND

[01:50:05]

WHETHER THERE MIGHT BE SOME FEDERAL REGULATIONS THAT ARE AT PLAY HERE. AND THAT'S THAT'S ON THAT'S ONGOING. I DON'T HAVE THOSE RESULTS TO REPORT YET, BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT THE ISSUE. SO THIS RESOLUTION BASICALLY JUST ASKS FOR THEM TO DO SOME SOME RESEARCH AND LOOK INTO INTO THE ISSUE. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANYBODY IN THE QUEUE ON THIS ONE. SO USUALLY THERE'S A TIMEFRAME FOR WHEN THIS. AND I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE A LOT GOING ON. BUT MAYBE, YOU KNOW, DAYS BY STATE. EXTENDED ALONG THE RECORD OF FOLKS THAT I CAN SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT TOO. SO FOR A LONG TIME WE DIDN'T ATTACH TIMEFRAMES. I KNOW IT'S BECOME A LITTLE BIT MORE COMMON PRACTICE IN RECENT YEARS UNDER THE CRS 60 DAYS IS THE SORT OF THEORETICAL LIMIT AFTER WHICH COUNCIL COULD PICK BACK UP AN ITEM. IF WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN A RECOMMENDATION BACK. THE ISSUE THERE IS THERE'S ALSO A STATUTORY HEARING REQUIREMENT.

AND SO EFFECTIVELY COUNCIL WOULD NEED TO DO EVERYTHING RIGHT. THEY NEED TO DO STAFF'S RESEARCH ROLL PRESENT PROPOSALS, BRING IN THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT. IT'S A LOT FOR US TO HANDLE ON A STANDARD SCHEDULE. WE NEED SPECIAL MEETINGS AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS. SO WE HAVE SORT OF FALLEN INTO A SOMETHING LIKE A SIX MONTH, 3 TO 6 MONTH, 90 TO 120 DAY STANDARD, I WOULD SAY.

AND OFTENTIMES, YOU KNOW, WE'VE LOOKED TO STAFF AT TO TALK ABOUT THEIR WORKLOAD, BUT IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT. WE DON'T HAVE TO PUT IN A, YOU KNOW, A DO BY DATE. IF WE DON'T IF YOU ALL DON'T WANT TO. JULIA, CAN YOU HAVE THIS BY OUR NEXT MEETING? ABSOLUTELY. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE WORKLOAD AND WHAT SEEMS REASONABLE KIND OF FOR YOU GUYS CONSIDERING WHAT YOU HAVE ON YOUR PLATE? SURE. OF COURSE. YOU KNOW, THE MORE TIME, THE BETTER, SO THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, HAVE APPROPRIATE MEETINGS AND THAT SORT OF THING. WE DID HAVE AN INTERN RESEARCH THIS TOPIC. SO WE ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE UP TO DATE ON THIS TOPIC THAN, SAY, OTHER ONES THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE HAD US LOOK AT. SO, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE A LONGER TIME FRAME WOULD BE BETTER. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE WOULD TRY FOR WHAT, 120 DAYS, WHATEVER IS THE LONGEST. BUT WE DO ALREADY HAVE SOME PRELIMINARY RESEARCH ON THIS. COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IS SIX MONTHS SUFFICIENT? YES. GRANTED.

SO DO WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING TO DO WE DO WE WANT TO PUT THAT IN DIRECTLY THAT WE'RE HOPING TO GET THIS BACK IN THE 180 DAY TIMEFRAME? YES. I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE LANGUAGE YOU'VE USED BEFORE. I THINK WE'VE JUST ADDED THE SORT OF CLAUSE TO THE END OF SECTION ONE THAT WOULD SAY SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF. AND SHALL RETURN THEIR FINDINGS TO COUNCIL WITHIN 180 DAYS. AND IS THAT THAT'S JUST A CLAUSE. THAT'S NOT AN AMENDMENT. OH, NO, IT WOULD BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE END OF SECTION ONE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO OFFER THAT AS AN AMENDMENT? COUNCIL MEMBER, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER 180 DAYS TIMELINE ON THIS, PLEASE. PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? OKAY. WITHOUT FURTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, THIS IS A RESOLUTION. SO IT REQUIRES A VOICE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. HI. ALL THOSE OPPOSED THE AYES HAVE IT I DON'T KNOW WHY. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'LL GO TO. OLD BUSINESS. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE ON OUR CALENDAR. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED TO ADDRESS BEFORE WE ADJOURN? WITH

[Adjournment Note: Agendas are followed at the discretion of the Chair. While an item may be listed, it does not mean all items will be heard and/or acted upon by the Committee.]

NO FURTHER ISSUES IN FRONT OF US? THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

Pending Legislation

Feb 04, 2025 Planning and Zoning Committee

Pending Legislation

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item