[Call to Order]
[00:00:05]
WELCOME TO THE MAY 11TH, 2025 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE. IT IS
[Roll Call]
1231. I AM THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, ANDREW OWEN. I AM JOINED BY MY VICE CHAIR, SCOTT REED, JOINED VIRTUALLY BY COUNCILMAN VACHON AND COUNCILMAN BRATCHER, AND JOINED IN CHAMBERS BY COUNCILWOMAN BETSY RUIZ. SO THIS MEETING IS BEING HELD PURSUANT TO KRS 61.826 AND COUNCIL RULE FIVE A. CHERYL, CAN YOU READ THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA FOR ME, PLEASE? SURE.[1. O-059-25 PENDING: AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8915 OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 2.2 ACRES AND BEING IN LOUISVILLE METRO (CASE NO. 24ZONE0113). 3/11/25 Planning and Zoning Committee Pending 3/4/25 Planning and Zoning Committee Held Action Required By May 7, 2025 Sponsors: Andrew Owen (D-9) ]
ITEM ONE AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8915 OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 2.2 ACRES AND BEING IN LOUISVILLE METRO CASE NUMBER 24, ZONE 000113 READ IN FULL. CAN I GET A MOTION IN A SECOND? SECOND. SO I PROPERLY MOVED AND SECONDED. I'LL START WITH BRIAN DAVIS, AND MAYBE YOU CAN GIVE US A TEE UP, AND THEN MAYBE TRAVIS CAN FILL IN THE BLANKS. SURE. NO. ABSOLUTELY NO. SO, BRIAN DAVIS, LOUISVILLE METRO OFFICE PLANNING. SORRY. A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, PLANNING COMMISSION HAD A PUBLIC HEARING IN REGARDING THIS CASE. AFTER THE HEARING WAS WAS HELD, OUR OFFICE RECEIVED AN EMAIL SAYING THAT THEY FELT THAT THE NOTICE WAS NOT DONE CORRECTLY. AND IN PARTICULAR, THERE WAS AN ADJOINING APARTMENT AND OFFICE COMPLEX NEXT DOOR IN WHICH THEY FELT THAT SOME OF THE UNITS HAD BEEN OMITTED FROM THE FROM THE MAILING LIST. AND SO AT THAT TIME WE WENT IN AND DID LIKE A THOROUGH MAP CHECK TO SEE, YOU KNOW, COMPARING THE LABELS WITH THE WITH THE UNITS THAT ARE THERE IN LOGIC. AND IT DID, IN FACT SHOW THAT A NUMBER OF THESE UNITS HAD BEEN EXCLUDED FROM THAT LIST. AND SO I THINK TRAVIS CAN EXPLAIN WHAT WHAT WE HAVE IN MIND TO REMEDY SOME OF THE NOTIFICATION PROBLEMS THAT HAVE COME UP WITH THIS CASE. SO, TRAVIS. GREAT. TRAVIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. TRAVIS. ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY SO THERE'S AN AMENDMENT BY SUBSTITUTION ON THE SYSTEM. THE BASIC CONCEPT IS TO SEND THE CASE BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO HAVE A SECOND MEETING WITH THE ADDITIONAL NOTICE THAT WAS MISSED, AND THEN SEND OUT A NEW RECOMMENDATION. GENERALLY, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE DO OBVIOUSLY FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. BUT IN THIS CASE WE CAUGHT IT EARLY ENOUGH AND THERE IS SOME TIME LEFT THAT WE THINK WE CAN GET THIS DONE BEFORE THE 90 DAYS WHEN, IN THEORY, THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD BECOME FINAL. SO WE GOT TIME ON THE CLOCK HERE TO DO IT, BUT WE NEED TO DO IT QUICKLY, HENCE THE SPECIAL MEETING, RATHER THAN WAITING FOR THE NEXT CYCLE. THAT 90 DAY DATE IS MAY 7TH, SO THIS WILL PROBABLY BE ON THE EITHER THE FIRST OR SECOND MEETING IN APRIL FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BUT EITHER WAY, THEY HAVE TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO GET THIS BACK. OUR INTERPRETATION OF THE CRS IS THAT ONCE A NEW RECOMMENDATION IS ISSUED, THAT 90 DAY CLOCK WILL START OVER. SO COUNCIL WILL SEE THIS AGAIN AND MAY LIKELY POSSIBLY LATE APRIL. BUT THE SUBSTITUTION JUST SORT OF EXPLAINS WHAT HAPPENED, THAT THE NOTICE WAS MISSED AND WHY WE WERE SENDING IT BACK DOWN. SO I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. BUT OTHERWISE THIS IS A PRETTY CLEAR PROCEDURAL MOVE. AND LIKE I SAID, IN THIS CASE WE HAVE THE TIMELINE TO ACCOMPLISH IT. THANK YOU. TRAVIS. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT THIS? I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY IN THE QUEUE. SO WHAT DO WE FROM A HOW DO WE DO WE DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION HERE FOR THE AMENDMENT OR WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO TO GET THIS ON. YES. YEAH. WE NEED SOMEONE TO INTRODUCE AND SECOND THE AMENDMENT. I CAN READ IT IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE. OTHERWISE, LIKE I SAID, IT IS ON THE SYSTEM. WHATEVER IS PREFERRED. WHAT WE GOT THAT ON THE SYSTEM WITHIN THE LAST HOUR OR SO. CORRECT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THE AMENDMENT OR WOULD ANYBODY LIKE IT TO BE READ? I THINK I'M HAPPY TO JUST HAVE SOMEBODY INTRODUCE IT AND WE CAN VOTE ON IT. UNLESS SOMEBODY CAN WE HAVE IT READ, PLEASE. THANK YOU. SURE. I CAN DO THAT. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8915 OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 2.2 ACRES AND BEING IN LOUISVILLE METRO CASE NUMBER 24, ZONE 0113, AMENDED BY SUBSTITUTION. WHEREAS THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL OF THE LOUISVILLE JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT. THE COUNCIL HAS CONSIDERED THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE LOUISVILLE METRO PLANNING COMMISSION, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ITS STAFF, AS SET OUT IN THE MINUTES AND RECORDS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CASE NUMBER 24. ZONE 0113. AND WHEREAS THE CASE WAS BEING CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL, I'M SORRY. WHILE THE CASE WAS BEING CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING[00:05:04]
AND ZONING COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL, IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT SOME RESIDENTS OF THE GLEN MARY APARTMENTS, WHICH WERE ENTITLED TO NOTICE, NEVER HAD SUCH NOTICE SENT. AND WHEREAS BECAUSE THE ISSUE WAS CAUGHT WHILE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE WAS CONSIDERING THE CASE, WITH SUFFICIENT TIME REMAINING WITHIN THE 90 DAYS SET BY KRS 100.2 11 SUB EIGHT TO CURE THE ISSUE AND HAVE A SECOND HEARING, COUNSEL WISHES TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR SUCH PROCESS TO OCCUR NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE LOUISVILLE BY THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL OF THE LOUISVILLE JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT AS FOLLOWS. SECTION ONE. THAT THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8915 OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 2.2 ACRES AND BEING IN LOUISVILLE METRO AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE MINUTES AND RECORDS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IN CASE NUMBER 24 0113 IS HEREBY RETURNED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE NOTICE ISSUES TO BE CORRECTED AND A SECOND HEARING HELD. THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHALL SCHEDULE THIS SECOND HEARING AS SOON AS NOTICE, AND THEIR CALENDAR WILL ALLOW TO ENSURE A NEW RECOMMENDATION IS ISSUED PRIOR TO MAY 7TH, 2025. SECTION TWO THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL TAKE EFFECT UPON ITS PASSAGE AND APPROVAL OR OTHERWISE BECOMING LAW. THANK YOU. TRAVIS. BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, I WANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE'VE BEEN JOINED BY COUNCILWOMAN SHAMIKA PARISH. RIGHT. AND I FAILED TO SAY BEFORE THAT COUNCILMAN HUDSON REQUESTED AND HAS BEEN GRANTED AN EXCUSED ABSENCE. CAN I GET A MOTION FOR THE AMENDMENT? MOTION? I'LL MAKE A QUESTION. I HAVE A QUESTION. COUNCILMAN BRATCHER. YES? THERE'S TWO PARCELS ON THIS ZONING. THERE'S ONE ON THE EAST SIDE OF BARDSTOWN ROAD. AND THEN THERE'S. THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE ON THE WEST SIDE OF BARDSTOWN ROAD THAT WAS THAT HAD THE OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD ADDRESS. WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE IS IT TAKE? DOES THIS TAKE IN EFFECT, BOTH PARCELS? IT DOES NOT. SO THERE WERE THERE WERE TWO SEPARATE PARCELS HERE AND SORT OF A RELATED THEY'RE RELATED. THEY'RE THE SAME OWNER AND THEY'RE I THINK CONSIDERED TO BE THEY'RE SORT OF AN ON SITE STORAGE FACILITY AND THEN AN OFF SITE OUTDOOR STORAGE FACILITY FOR VEHICLES AND TRAILERS AND SUCH. AND THE CASE THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT THE OLD BARDSTOWN ROAD CASE 24, ZONE 0113 WAS THE ONE WITH THE NOTICE ISSUES. THE OTHER ONE WAS NOTICED CORRECTLY, AND SO THAT ONE WILL CONTINUE ON WITH ITS CURRENT CLOCK, BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY NO REASON TO REMAIN THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. THEY HAVE INDIVIDUAL. THEY'RE SEEKING TWO DIFFERENT ZONINGS. THEY'RE LOCATED, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT FACTS SO THAT ONE WILL CONTINUE AND NEED TO BE ACTED ON HERE IN THE NEXT. ACT ON BEFORE MAY 7TH.IT'LL JUST BE THIS ONE WITH THE ACTUAL NOTICE ISSUES THAT WOULD BE SENT BACK. WELL, WHAT? IF I CAN ASK ANOTHER QUESTION? WHAT? OH GOSH, I FORGOT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. SO THE ONE THAT WAS NOT AFFECTED. OH, DO THEY BOTH HAVE THE SAME 0113? NO ORDINANCE? NO. SO ONE IS 0113 AND ONE IS 0115. AND THOSE ARE THE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NUMBERS. THE ORDINANCE NUMBERS ARE 59 AND 60. OKAY. THANK YOU. IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I APPRECIATE YOU CLEARING THAT UP THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO MOVE NECESSARILY MOVE TOGETHER. SO WE HAVE THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED. DOES THIS REQUIRE A ROLL CALL OR DOES THIS REQUIRE A VOICE VOTE. ALL RIGHT.
SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE AYE AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED PLEASE SAY NAY. OKAY.
THE AYES HAVE IT. AND SO WHAT ABOUT WILL THIS GO TO OLD BUSINESS THEN. ON ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA. YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS METAPHOR TO OLD BUSINESS. SO THAT WAS THE ONLY ITEM WE HAD ON THE AGENDA FOR TODAY. HAVE A ROLL CALL. OH SO WE'VE GOT AMENDMENT AND NOW WE HAVE TO DO A ROLL CALL OKAY. SO ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS BEFORE WE HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE ON THIS ITEM. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE OPEN A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. VICE CHAIR REED. YES. COMMITTEE MEMBER PERRY. RIGHT. YES. COMMITTEE MEMBER. ROY. COMMITTEE MEMBER. BIRCHER. YES. COMMITTEE MEMBER. JOHN. YES. VOTING IS CLOSING. CHAIR. YOU HAVE SIX YES VOTES. WITH SIX YES VOTES. THIS IS APPROVED AND WILL BE MOVED TO THE TO OLD BUSINESS ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY NEED TO WANTED TO ADDRESS BEFORE WE ADJOURN?
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.