Planning & Zoning - Regular Meeting

Good morning. I would like to call to order the Danville Boyle County Planning and Zoning Commission. And I would like to begin by having a prayer for us today. Is anyone willing? Thank you.

OK. Thank you, Lord, for gathering us today. Thank you for the blessings of this community. for its uniqueness, for its special attributes. Help us in our considerations today to respect that, respect the gifts that you've given us for the earth and for our area, and to respect one another. And we ask this in your name, amen.

Thank you so much. We're going to go ahead and begin by looking at the minutes of the April 22nd meeting. Do I have a motion in regards to the minutes? Do I have a second?

Second.

All those in favor of approving the minutes as distributed, please say yes or raise your hand.

Yes.

Thank you. Those will be approved as distributed. Financial report, Mr. Min.

I'm not going to refer to any specific numbers. I'm going to give you some general comments. First of all, the April income and expenses were in line with the recent budget amendment. Secondly, looking at what we would expect for May and June, we expect that the total year planning and zoning income and expenses will be in line with what we recently approved in the budget amendment. No surprises there. As some of you may remember, we do share the same bank account with the Danville Architectural Heritage Board. We have separate budgets, but we share the same bank account. Assuming that DAHB receives its remaining contributions from Danville, then our ending cash balance should be about $40,000, which was what was forecasted in our recent budget amendment. Nothing unusual relative to the budget amendment. Now, Hannah has started putting together our budget for next year. I've also taken a look at the numbers. And we both independently, I think, have reached the conclusion that we will have to be asking for an increase in contributions from Danville and Boyle County. as we go through the next budget cycle. Those numbers are yet final numbers to be determined, but we'll be reviewing that with you. I think we expect to be reviewing Hanna's first draft with the budget committee in the next couple of weeks. Then the intent is to bring it to the full commission in our June meeting. Those are my comments. Any questions?

When was the last time we asked for an increase?

It hasn't occurred as long as I've been here. I've been here 12 years. My guess is we actually put in for a decrease when they reduced the staff from four to two. I don't think we've asked for an increase since. It's 12 plus years.

Any further questions? I'll need a motion for approving the financial report.

I'll move to approve. Second.

All those in favor, please say yes or raise your hand. Yes. Thank you. The financial report is approved. We're going to go on to construction sureties. Hannah?

We've got two construction sureties on the agenda today, Jody Sharp Construction Company, Hunt Farm Section 7 has asked for a release of its bond in the sum of $89,326.25 for work completed. And you can see that it's shown on the presentation above you. We are still working with the county to find an engineer to go out and survey that and ensure that it's ready to be released. So we're still working on that, but that should be up for release next month. And then the second one on the agenda this month is Danville Host Center Estates will be will see the release of their performance bond in the sum of one million eight hundred thousand or eight thousand fifty eight. You know what I mean? You know what I'm saying? they're going to be asking for a full release of that and we have done a site visit and is ready to be released the only thing that they are waiting on is to schedule at t um to remove the utility pole that's on the corner we need 30 degree visibility and so i'm comfortable releasing it before that because they they are waiting on the utility company um so that is the only thing

So do we need to approve either of these today? Yes, the Danville Host Center estates to be released today. So we have any questions for Hannah in regards to that? Do I have a motion?

I'll move to approve.

All those in favor? Thank you. That'll be approved. Do you have anything else, Hannah? Not for the construction charities. We're going to go into public hearing and I want to make a couple of comments about it. First of all, this is an area that's obviously inspired a lot of interest by everyone and the commission wishes to hear from folks because we know it's an issue that may affect you, your property, or your interests. So we want to try to hear from as many people as we possibly can. So that will lead to me asking for you to be as concise in your comments as you can. We have asked folks ahead of time who wanted to speak, and I have a list of those, and we have people who signed up to speak today. So we'll endeavor to hear from everyone about their comments. But again, I just ask you to be as concise as you can in your comments. When you come forward, you will need to speak your name and your address so that we may have that for the record. And when you do, you'll need to come up to the microphone. Obviously, we respect you. We hope that you will respect others and their opinions today. So I need a motion to go into public hearing. I need a second. Second. All in favor of going into public hearing? Okay, so we are in public hearing, and Hannah, you can start us off with the description of the first item.

All right. The applicant is proposing to rezone three tracts of land containing 1.502 acres located at 115 East Walnut Street from multifamily residential to central business to allow for commercial sales outside displays, and the parcel will continue as it is operated Sorry, wrong one. The Boyle County Landmark Trust has applied for a zoning map amendment on a .585 acre parcel of land known as 115 East Walnut Street from multifamily to central business. It is located right near Constitution Square. It is zoned RM3 multifamily. It is flumed for downtown, which allows for mixed use, multifamily, residential, institutional, and government.

Okay. You'll need to step outside and we'll make sure and call you back in. Thanks.

And so in your packet there is the site plan for those three parcels. And this zone change is attached to the subdivision approval number two. So there will be a subdivision that is attached with the zone change as well.

Do you have any other comments about it?

It is in compliance with the 2025 comprehensive plan and plume, which is in your staff reports as well.

Director, can I have a question to make sure I understand? This is tied to a later topic we have in subdivision approval. How are we going to handle the voting or the directing?

I believe we'll do it at the same time if at all possible.

We'd have to make sure we note that in the minutes and the times because it's not a combined agenda item.

No, no, no, no. It's just one is contingent on the other.

Okay.

So I have a list of names of folks who wanted to speak, who signed up previously. Are any of those folks whose names or who has signed up previously want to speak in favor of this?

Madam Chairman, can I ask one other question before we get to that? Absolutely. Has to do with our packet of information we have in here. You've listed, Director, that you have a comprehensive plan review that we've done on here in the categories. and what evidence you have so far supports the creating quality neighborhoods, grow a diverse economy, and preserve community resources. Those are all very good items. You pulled that directly from our list of goals and objectives in the comprehensive plan.

Including several objectives for the preserved community resources. I think the only thing that I'd like to touch on in the staff report is the recommendation from staff to create a buffer between the existing apartment building and the proposed historic log cabin, just because currently there is a fence and tree line there. So I think having a buffer, either vegetation or fence, will put the log cabin and have it face, you know,

or into the picture you showed on the screen that's a very narrow area but as i recall yeah it's got a larger part we're talking about a buffer along that right even the area where it dips yes yeah between the current apartment building and where the log cabin is proposed to go um just to make sure the log cabin is you know and you're you're thinking the fence is adequate for that yes or or shrubs or whatever whatever they'd like to do okay just a visual

Okay. I guess I have a general question. Yes. On the description of request, it talks about the partial continue as has operated for years as equipment sales, name the agricultural and home use tractors, mowers, and accessories. Yes.

I'm so sorry. That is incorrect. That was from a previous. Yeah. Sorry about that.

Thank you. Okay.

Good question.

Thanks for the clarification. Yes. I appreciate it.

Any other questions for Ms. Gray before we begin with? Okay, I have five names of folks who signed up previously to speak at the public hearing. Are any of those folks individuals who want to speak in favor? Come to the microphone.

Good morning. My name is George Coomer. I am a resident of Danville. I'm also a member of the Boyle Landmark Trust Board. I'm here to present this along with Harold Edwards, our chair, and Tim Montgomery. Kendall Wise is also here, and they can help me answer any questions. So I appreciate you all hearing us this morning. I know your agenda's full, you're busy. I will be brief and respect your valuable time. I do want to say that you have a good staff. Hannah, Lisa, and Henry have been monumental in helping us navigate this, so kudos to them. So in 1774, John Crow came from Pennsylvania with James Herod. This structure is likely part of the original settlement grant from John Crow, one of six 1774 lottery cabin sites, quite possibly one of the three cabins built on Crow's land before 1777. According to our local historian, Carolyn Crabtree, she believes that this was the original site of Crow Station. The original cabin was 1,400 square feet, a two-story double-pin log structure with a 10-foot dog trot between the pins. Most of the logs are beech, poplar, and oak. In 1784, John Crow sold 76 acres of land to Daniel Walker for five shillings. Not sure what that is. The land was adjacent to Crow's home, and Daniel Walker used it to build the town of Danville. By 1785, 63 lots had been sold with houses built on many of them. The house was previously located at 232 North 3rd Street. It was demolished in 2008. Through the wise foresight of a few individuals who were past Judge Executive Tony Wilder, Mayors Hugh Coomer and Mike Parris, Carolyn Crabtree, Brenda Brown Willoughby, Brenda Willoughby Brown, and others with financial contributions from Boyle County Fiscal Court, the City of Danville, Boyle Landmark Trust, the Heart of Danville, Mike Paris, the logs were cataloged and saved. These historically significant logs are presently in the possession of Boyle Landmark Trust. As it was always the intention of those who saved this history to reconstruct the cabin on Constitution Square, we, Bull Landmark Trust, are picking up an 18-year-old torch and are striving to bring the project to fruition. We have entered into a purchase contract with Diamond Design and Holdings to acquire a strip of land adjacent to Constitution Square next to Grayson's Tavern to reconstruct this cabin. It's our intention once complete to gift the cabin back to the county to become an addition of Constitution Square. We come here today to ask your blessing and assistance in granting the zone change in plan amendment to help us bring this to fruition. Cool.

Thank you.

Do you have any questions of full landmark trust?

I think it's a great idea to support this type of category. Preserving the community resources historic element is a major factor. As I understand it, that property will be somewhat Constitution Square flow. It's part of that one when it's actually finished.

The front of the cabin will face the side of Grayson's Tavern. We had originally asked to construct it on Constitution Square. The State Heritage Council holds the easement and did not grant our request, but such is life. We plan B. We have option to purchase land to make it happen.

And the property is all walkable with no driveways or roadways, in a sense.

Yes. That's category two. Absolutely. It'll be just like another cabin at Constitution Square, essentially.

Thank you for the clarity. I appreciate that. Sure.

Anyone else? Thank you.

Thank you. Would anybody else like to speak in favor of this item for the public hearing? Would anyone wish to speak in opposition to this item? Any further discussion amongst the commission?

I'm going to ask an obvious question. I'm assuming this cabin is for display only, not for habitation.

Yes. OK. Any other discussion? If not, then I need to have a motion, please.

Motion to approve.

Do we need to add the contingency about the fencing that was raised as a staff?

HENRY, WOULD YOU HELP?

I THINK THAT STAFF'S JUSTIFICATIONS ON PAGE 8 ABOUT THE COMP PLAN SUPPORT THIS MOTION. MR. NOLET ASKED ABOUT CONDITIONING ON USE OF A BUFFER, AND MR. KRUMER, DID I HEAR ANY COMMENT ON THAT BUFFER BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES? IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'D AGREE TO?

YOU DID NOT, BUT I THINK WE WOULD AGREE TO THAT.

OKAY. SO ADDING A CONDITION ABOUT A BUFFER ALSO PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY.

So motion to approve amended by the buffer. And with the conditions that Henry's noted in our... And staff justifications. Justification. Right.

Mr. Mann, I think we're recommending approval of the zone map amendments, and then the plan, we will have a separate vote on, and that approval will be conditioned on passage of the zone change.

Okay, so we need to do the zone change first.

Right.

And Mr. Farr, it's given us our first moment. Motion to approve the zone change. Okay. Can I get a second? Second. Thank you. All those in favor, please say yes.

Yes.

Okay. All right. Can we, Henry, is it acceptable for us to do the subdivision approval since we're already on this topic?

I think that's chair's prerogative and I think it makes sense.

Okay. Let's go ahead and talk then about the item number two under the subdivision approvals. Is there more you'd like to share?

No more, but there is the plat and it's also in your staff report as well of that subdivision for that one parcel. But if you all have any questions, there are no other comments.

Did you talk about lighting requirements on this property?

No.

Whether there is additional lighting? The reason I suggest this, and we are nuzzling it, it's kind of behind some other buildings. It's certainly and clearly behind the multifamily building. Safety and security comes to mind of lighting requirements. I don't know what the intention was. I should have asked it during the other item.

I don't think we had discussed lighting.

I guess I bring it up only to note the fact that you need to consider that safety and security aspects of a relatively isolated building.

Security as well as sensitivity to the neighbors, I think.

Yeah.

Sensitivity to the neighbors to make sure.

And I believe we find requirements for lighting within the zoning ordinance, so those will have to be followed.

Yes, you're right. You're right.

Any other discussion about this item? I'll need a motion on the subdivision.

I'll move to approve the subdivision.

Can I get a second? All those in favor? Thank you. That'll be approved. Would someone go and get Ms. Douglas?

Thank you all.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, I didn't hear, was that motion conditioned upon zone map amendment approval? Thank you.

Here we go.

Okay, let's go ahead and go on then to the second item. Ms. Gray.

All right. All right. Kong Cheng Tai has applied for a site plan amendment for the construction of 3,780 square foot commercial structure at 1202 Houstonville Road in Danville. The property is currently zoned highway business. And so you can see the Google image to the right. And so this is right off Houstonville Road. And that structure behind the current building with the nail salon, that is currently demolished. And there is fencing around it for construction. This is the original site plan that was approved in 2014. and this is the site plan amendment that they're trying to get to. We had discussions in tech review of the fact that this current site plan is not in concurrence with the plan the site plan that was approved in 2014 um there's been a lot of issues especially because there is a residence to the directly to the right as you can see in the zoning so there's single family residents abutted to the right um and there that requires additional buffering and additional drainage plans. So we have had flooding issues with those residents to the right. Originally in the site plan, there was curbing gutters and landscaping to try to mitigate some of that stormwater. So that was kind of the discussion we had in Tech Review was, This is obviously a little more than 5% of that original site plan. If you can see in Google Earth, the parking lines are straight and not tilted like they plan to be. And so a lot of things are different. So we had the discussion of whether to meet in the middle. And they have made those corrections. So in the updated site plan, there is buffering to the right to try to mitigate some of that flood water. So we are open to, I think, two options, whether having them redo the application altogether for a full site plan and just kind of redo it, or kind of compromise and meet in the middle.

If I might jump in.

Oh, go ahead.

I was going to say Hannah and I had the chance to talk about this a little bit, and I think that it's reasonable to ask that any mitigating factors shown on this amended plan be followed as a way to remedy some things that maybe haven't been enforced since the original 2014 approval.

Yeah, and Director, let me go back and just the water flow is from the bottom of the page to the top of the page. Yes. So the new building is actually on the top.

So it actually goes over to the residence to the north over on 222.

other reason we're looking for this is not just around the building being built right but they're modifying and improving the entire parking area and road and parking driving area paths yes that's what that's all about yes yeah and so i drove over there yesterday and they are kind of ripping up the whole 1200 um so that was kind of discussions we had in tech review what to If you've been to that area, that's a very low slope, almost nearly flat. Water does collect. But the best direction to send the water is to the top of the page. Because there's a major area there on the street that collects it that's already been put there. So the key here is to try to attempt to not flood the other directions. But there are no slopes and valleys there. That is a very flat area.

And I think the corrections that were made, it's not in your staff report right now because we got them, but I think they do kind of meet in the middle. There's landscape buffering to the right side. So the corrections do try to have the spirit of the old.

It seems this is a good approach to handling and directing the water is that type of category, give it some place to be absorbed.

Yeah, exactly.

Okay.

So I understand that you have a couple of options for us today. We can either request a completely new application or we could accept that the applicant has made changes that you suggested and that they're adequate at this time. Is that what you're saying? Correct, yes. So those are our two options. Yes, ma'am.

Henry? At this point, I don't see that a new application is necessary for us to have some of the improvements that are shown on the submitted plan. And I think in our motion, we can indicate our intent that that submitted plan be followed and these improvements be made to fix water issues. Okay.

Is there someone who would like to speak in favor of this application?

I'm Kendall Wise from Banish Engineering, and we worked on the project in 2014, put together the site plan that Hannah had on the screen earlier. The site had two buildings in 2014. It had pavement in the front of the two buildings.

Can you flip your microphone? Flip your mic up a little bit. Thank you.

Thank you, Kendall.

Thanks, Kendall.

In 2014, there were two buildings on the property, and there was pavement in the front of the building, so the property in 2014 was largely, not entirely paved, but largely impervious. All of the conditions behind the property, which is in the area of, I think that's Calvary Baptist Church, and the homes that are just to the north were all there at that time. Really no conditions have changed other than the applicant did not, they deviated from the plan that was presented in 2014 and approved in 2014 and added more pavement behind their building than what we showed. We've got more than 20 feet of open space on the 2014 plan they went ahead and made use of the land they owned and paved it so they needed more parking they felt like so they put pavement down no one said they couldn't at that time so now here we are 10 plus years later and yes we're amending the site plan um but unfortunately they didn't follow the plan in 2014 and and so we've got a concern for drainage issues, which has been an issue ever since. It's not something that has just crept up as a result of what's been going on since 2014. The new plan that we put together, they've demolished the home. They got a permit to demolish the home that was on the north side of the lot. It is gone at this point. proposing to put back a commercial center similar to the one that was built on the south side of the lot to help. get back to the the intent of what was going on in 2014 where we had that open space and trees and little buffer area we've added we're going to cut out three parking spaces in the rear through the existing parking spaces and turn those into a grass median with a tree on them so the the revised plan that hannah was referring to shows those changes I'm just trying to get back to providing some sense of landscaping and buffering in the rear.

Have you considered using permeable paving anywhere in there?

Well, it would require demolishing the pavement that's there, replacing it with something that would allow infiltration of water.

Kendall, over here, is the existing pavement already being demolished anyhow? I didn't have the chance to drive by the site.

No, it's in fairly good condition, the new pavement that was put down after 2014. Not sure how to, you know, it's just an unfortunate circumstance where there was no policing done to to make sure the plan was built correctly and.

So now we have a kindle. I drove over yesterday. It looked like when they demolish that white structure that they also demolish some of the blacktop.

Behind the house, there's some some of the pavement will have to be replaced that was damaged as a result of taking the house down. But for the most part, the payments. still intact, especially behind the commercial building that's there, the storefront building.

Thank you. I believe there's someone from the audience who wishes to speak to this issue.

My name is Chester Cavanaugh.

Can you come forward and say your name?

I beg to differ with Mr. Wise about the house on Fourth Street.

Can you say your name and address, please?

My name is Chester Cavanaugh. My address is 314 Brookside Drive, but I own a resident, a piece of property on Fourth Street. And just this week, the city of Danville had to go out there and unstop a manhole that was overflowing on 4th Street. And with the residents in the houses, it hasn't been considered. You got a school back there in the back, along with low residential people that live in the back. And has there been a traffic study on this? Has there been a utility study on this? I don't think so. I don't know who gave them permission to tear down that facility. And I don't know exactly what Kendall's talking about, what's gonna be replaced right there. but I'd like to see at least a traffic study, a utility study, a water and sewer and electric. It is a busy street. And I just hope that this body considers all what I'm asking about.

Thank you. Kendall, do you have any further comments in response to these questions or? Comments?

the previous speaker said that he had a home on 4th Street, which is not going to be downstream of our property. So I'm I'm I'm not real sure. The you said you had a home on 4th Street. And so you would be you would be you would not be downstream of our development. So he would

Sir, let him answer your concerns.

I just don't feel like he's in a place to be concerned about stormwater if he's upstream of our property.

But nonetheless, it's... Sir, let him address your concerns.

Yeah, but we're talking about a very, very small piece of property and a very small amount of asphalt. So the contribution to any stormwater problems that have evolved around 4th Street will, I mean, it's hard to point a finger at this project as being a source of the problem for stormwater problems along 4th Street.

Sir, sir, let Kendall speak and then you'll have your chance. Let him speak.

As far as the traffic on 4th Street, we're talking about a fraction, tiny fraction of traffic on 4th Street.

One is not?

I don't understand how you can require us to do a traffic study for this amount of improvement.

Madam Chair, the typical requirements for traffic impact studies would be 50,000 square feet of non-residential space, which I think we're not close to with this. Which we don't have. Yes.

And the comment about utilities study?

We have all of the utilities on site to serve the project. The home had sewer and water. We're using the same sewer and water to serve the new commercial building that's being put in.

Mr. Wise, will the total footprint of an asphalted area be What percentage change versus, say, when there was a residence there and all the blacktop?

Very similar.

Very similar footprint to what was there 14 years ago?

Not 14 years ago. Since 14, there's very little change. OK. The space that was supposed to be unpaved is on the right side of that. That's the old site plan. There was 25 plus feet of grass and landscaping that was supposed to have been installed that was actually paved. That happened in 2014.

Provided there's not a clog in the storm sewer stormwater system, there hasn't been water issues for those residents?

This water drains over land through the grass, through the yards. It goes across the neighbor's properties and over to the street just to the north of us, which would be Lincoln. From there, it can get into a storm sewer.

Thank you. Kendall, if I could hear it one more time, are there discussions in this plan of adding new containment measures? Are there improvements that are part of this? No. Okay. No.

I thought I heard when you were here previously, you were talking about more buffering.

We're adding three landscaped islands. We're gonna take three parking stalls out, so basically a nine foot by 20 foot space that's paved currently, that was paved in 2014, that wasn't supposed to have been paved. We're gonna remove those three parking stalls, put back sod and three trees to try and mitigate what shouldn't have been done. That's what we can offer.

Thank you. Now, sir, if you have further comments, please come forward.

Water doesn't drain to 4th Street. It drains to the back. And I'd like to know, in his planning, why didn't he consider a catch basin?

Have you talked to the city engineer about this?

No, I have not. It wasn't my place to talk to the city engineer since Mr. Wise is wanting to do his project.

I mean, in general, about the topic of water.

Well, I don't have to. The city engineer should know that just here they had a manhole on 4th Street. Water... pushing up out of. And they had to divert the traffic.

And Mr. Wise also, and during the tech review meeting that Planning and Zoning has, the city engineer was part of the discussion of this area.

Well, I hope Mr. Wise get with the city engineer.

They have had, and I encourage you to go back and talk to the city engineer again now that he's aware of this one.

Well, I'm considering it, but I'm just giving the general idea. Yeah. Different than what he's painting for this commission.

Sir, when the storm sewer is functioning as it should, do you have water issues there?

I would say that you're going to have water issues all the way. If you know Calvary Baptist Church, and there's a ditch line that goes down behind it. I beg to differ, if you catch, just here lately, some of the rain that we got, it can get wild down through there.

And that's a general flow, as I mentioned earlier there, that's a gentle slope that's there, and it's not much of a slope.

Well, most of the time, if you're going to build a new structure, you would probably figure in a catch basin. and that's to maintain the water in a certain kind of flow. I just ask to consider it. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

Anyone else who would like to speak on this issue? So we're discussing a site plan amendment. Does the commission have further discussion? Hearing none, do we have a motion in regards to this site plan amendment?

A motion to approve.

OK. Do I have a second?

I'd like to include with that the removal of the pavement, the adding of the trees that Mr. Wise talked about. Is that OK?

Yeah, absolutely. Actually, I was including that in the amended plan.

as this amended plan in front of us. Okay.

Yes.

So that's second? Yes. Any further discussion?

Is there any other requirements, Henry, that you can be aware of? that we need to consider?

At this time, we've heard what the improvements and changes are, which is going to address some of the things that weren't followed before. And if the city engineer was involved in tech review on this, I think that speaks to whatever concerns or updates we might ask for.

Okay, thank you.

Without any further warning or mandate from him.

All those in favor, please raise your hand. The site plan amendment is approved. Now we're going to go on to item three.

All right. Richard Chin and Mary C. Wiles have applied for a zoning map amendment of their 133.85 acres of land located off U.S. Highway 127 south in Danville from agriculture to highway business, office professional, general business, and multifamily duplex RM2 and multifamily RM3.

Do you have a later picture showing what section we're going to talk about? That's a large area.

Yes, yes. So if you, that section right there, it's outlined per the PVA website, and these are all in your staff report as well. But let me get to the Google Earth image. So that section right there is what we're looking at. It's an odd tract of land, but... zoning different areas of zoning yes yes and that's what i think sam's question was around are we seeing where those those zones are yeah i was going to do one level deeper when you're ready um so our that is maybe what you're talking about just the different designations of the zones um also this is in your staff report but this will show you kind of where they want to change those zones

I just, I thought we, can we spend a little, because I'm still lost on the specific locations and the zones. I'm aware of what we have in the flume and the comprehensive plan discussions that we've had, which is a good, which is the guiding principles.

And so this is the conceptual master plan as well. So it kind of illustrates how these zones will be laid out. So up at the front left corner, it'll be restaurants and commercial. To the back left corner, or the back right corner, it'll be residential with a clubhouse area. and RM2 to the right, and then RM2 through that grassy area as well. But in my staff report, I also describe what I believe or what staff believes It falls under for comp plan goals and objectives and the FLUM. I think creating quality neighborhoods, expand housing options, grow diverse economy and preserve community resources. And it is in line with the future land use map as well.

Again, I'm assuming in terms of zoning, this is highway business.

It would be helpful if somebody could come up here and talk about the various areas.

Yeah. Maybe when they present, they can describe which areas are which. What we're being asked to zone is separate areas of zoning.

Dale Shepperson with AGE Engineering. If you'll look, you see the north arrow up there. The property to the north is office and professional district. As you come down towards the south, it's a RM2, two-family residential. That's sort of the... If you'll go back to the conceptual plan, Hannah, you see where the big store building is in front, the property to the rear of that is the RM2. Of course, the property out front will be highway business, and then in the back, it's more residential back there also. The very back corner Up to the top of the page there is general business instead of residential. That's for like a park area or something, as you can tell on the conceptual plan.

Does that help? Yeah, but you're talking about that area up there.

To the very top of the page, yes.

So put the main 127 across the bottom of the page. Highway 1.

Highway business, yes.

Is that highway business?

Yes.

Is this all highway business as well?

The multifamily is to the right corner, right there. There's some also, that's RM3 and then everything to the front along the highway is highway business.

We're adjacent to the basically Walmart on the back side. How far are we from Junction City?

How far?

How far down to Junction City? Do you remember?

Probably a mile and a half, two miles to Junction.

From the, how far from the turnoff to go to the airport? Is it further down as well? Go on that one.

Are you talking about Airport Road from here? Yes. Backed up two and a half, three miles.

Thank you. It's all backed up directly to Walmart. Yes, I know. It's inside the city.

It's 133 acres gathered, so it's a huge area is what I'm getting. Correct. There's a lot of categories to put together.

Correct and it's all that that that black dash line that you see on your plan everything the the zoning is represented on the on the top side and the bottom side of all those lines so you can see what the zoning is there on your on the plat and then and then when you put the conceptual plan sort of over top of that you can understand why that zoning is where it's at.

And this is all within the city limits?

Yes. Thank you.

Yeah, it has city sewer. Yes. Yeah. Utility. While you're here, I'll just ask a question. The roads, the Highway 127, to get to the properties on the top of the paper, which is basically east of this property, access roads? You've got streets that are going to flow that way. Are they on here? The various roads that go north that would get to the properties where the word conceptual master plan to get to that property? Is that how you get to the other property outside of this 133 acres on the north side of the page?

Dale, I think he's asking about sub streets to the north that we talked about in tech review.

Yes. Yes. Are you talking about connector streets? Connector streets. Yes.

How many connector streets you got going to that property up at the top?

I think there's three.

I like posters, but sometimes this shows better, is why I'm saying.

OK. All right. Let's hold on here. So can you indicate for us where the substreets would be?

I can't, I cannot indicate exactly where they'll be at, but they will be to the, you can see, you can see the, I wish I had a point, the road going up to Mr. Ballard's property there. It's, it will tie in with the roads as proposed on here, if that makes any sense to you. Yes, the roundabouts, you know, we're working with the state, of course, with this project as to what to put in there. Whether or not those will actually be roundabouts, I can't tell you that. They have not approved those. No. Everything that's working in the state is with them. However, it was their idea.

And I believe y'all have this concept plan in front of y'all as well.

We do. We're trying to figure out what we have, and we threw all the documentation.

Okay. Sir, if you want to speak, you'll have to come forward and state your name.

Okay.

Would you let him come forward, please?

Yeah, I think we probably need to let the attorney that's representing us speak. And then in the end, we'll have, I think personally that would be better. That might clarify a few things.

Let them present. I live there, so I can explain to people what's there. Sorry, I had my knee worked on. If we had a pointer, I live where the conceptual. Name, please, and address. Peter Ballard, Danville, Kentucky, 516 Poplar Road.

Thank you.

Resident, 30 plus years on that property. had horses, my neighbors all have cows. There's no roads going through up there that he said he thought there was a street going up there. It's all farmland. Those are all roundabouts. As far as, this is backing off a little bit, but I got a notice in the mail on a Friday Three neighbors got notices.

Sir, I'm sorry. I'm going to have to interrupt you there. Our bylaws require that we hear the applicant first. Public comment is something that can be offered afterwards. I think the chair had you come up to explain on the map.

Just for everybody, there's no roads on the top part of that map.

Thank you, sir. Thank you. Those who wish to speak in favor of this, please, your turn to come up.

Yes, we all have. Yes, we do. Well, we've got some additional.

Is this a written document of what you're going to say?

Yes, and I will read essentially all the way through it. That way you've got all the information.

Yeah, because you're giving it to us right now.

Right, I understand. All right, good morning. My name is Chris Whitworth. I represent JSKG Properties, which is comprised of Kelly Griffith and Jeremy Shepherd. They're two local business owners and lifelong residents of Boyle County. And obviously, we've also got the engineer of record with AGE and Mr. Chin, who's the current owner of the property. So I'm going to read all the way through this proposal. And if you have any questions, just stop me. We're excited to present a plan to you today for what is historically called the Chin Property. It's approximately 136 acres just south of Walmart on Highway 127. It is being acquired or the plan is for it to be acquired by my clients. This proposal has been well thought out, highly critiqued, and master planned as a comprehensive idea. to have a combination of appropriate zones for highway commercial, office and professional, two-family residential, multi-family residential, and general business. This master plan, conceptual master plan was developed with the assistance of architects and it has been developed in consultation with the city of Danville. There's been an extensive amount of input and feedback from the city and what has been created is in your packets. There is, I believe this master plan that we have behind you is exhibit A and the plan is for, come to be known as Oak Trace. You can see on the proposal that it places highway commercial along 127 just south of Walmart with office professional adjacent to Walmart farther east and serving kind of as a buffer between the highway commercial and the agricultural zone. There's a small section of multifamily residential and That abuts the highway commercial on the south end, plus there's additional sections of two-family residential and multi-family residential. Let's see here. That's trying to point you in the right spot here. That would be on the kind of the going east, I guess, kind of as a gradual transition towards the agricultural. Again, the master plan is kind of well-balanced. It's multifaceted. It covers retail, commercial, but also professional office space, restaurant, townhome-style homes, condos, apartments, as well as the single family and quadplex with the appropriate cultural and park space, as you see there. in the rear so just that's kind of a intro now uh big picture there this is a 136 and a half acre parcel that's comprised of four tracks and we kind of got into that already but the request is to zone we've got let's see if i can do this while looking From an identification standpoint, you've got the plat map attached. So it's kind of hard to point to this map. But we've got ag just south of Walmart, the various zones that would allow for the economic development in a responsible manner that also respects the character of the property. So the zones requested are RM2, RM3, general business, OP and HB were highway business. So that is attached as exhibit B, which I'm not sure we've got where it can be put, excuse me, put up here behind you. Again, the proposed use is a mix, but it's an appropriate mix that considers the nature and character of the property and the surrounding properties. So there we go. The highway business section is, again, located along the highway that aligns with Walmart. It complements Lowe's. And that is kind of the commercial hub of Boyle County. Follows the traffic counts, I believe in 2024, the 127 bypass traffic count there was in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day. So limiting the highway commercial to what is necessary for the commercial retail allows for a mix of ancillary general business, restaurants, offices, professional, office space, residential, but the traffic count does show that An appropriate amount of acreage would be necessary for the highway commercial. In various zones, take into account the city's proposed transportation plans and also the existing utilities that are onsite. I hate to read all this to you, but I'm not sure how to go all the way through this without essentially reading it to you. All of the property is currently zoned ag. However, in order to achieve the desired conceptual master plan that's been shown and to promote the proper planning with needed infrastructure, various zones are requested as exhibit B. And again, you've got the two-family residential, the multi-family residential, general business, office and professional, and highway business. The future land use map has three different designations for this property. 28 acres at the corner of, uh, Houston road and Poplar well road have a recommended zoning of central business or general business. The 75 acres that surround, have recommended zoning for R1C, RM2, RM3, NB, or OP. And then the final recommendation on the future land use map is for what would be the southeast portion of the property. And that includes R1A, R1B, and R1C as the recommended zoning. So as you can see from the proposal, The specific goal of creating smooth transitions from ag to residential to general business and office and professional, as well as the highway business, it is designed to respect the character of the area while also achieving the stated goals, the comprehensive plan, and to create proper economic development for the community. So just kind of walk through it a little more in depth. I'll start with the easternmost portion of the property and then move towards 27 as we go along. So for the easternmost portion, the proposed zone change plat matches the future land use map for the southeast portion of the property in that it proposes a residential use, but the request is for RM2 and RM3, which is slightly different, but it's necessary to provide setbacks and also to achieve the density that makes the project itself feasible. As you can tell from the conceptual master plan, the proposed Residential use is appropriate for the project as a whole. The city of Danville and Boyle County have a need for additional housing units, and it's obviously a supply issue. The demand is there, and this would help alleviate that particular issue. The proposed development will also meet that demand by providing an additional supply of housing that includes the multifamily. Goal number two of the comprehensive plan is to, quote, expand housing options, and specifically to enable the production of affordable housing and diverse housing stock. This project specifically addresses that need and will also meet the additional stated goal of increasing housing opportunities and supporting amenities for residents, specifically for residents to age in place. Part of the proposed zoning for the next section moving towards 127 is RM2, RM3, and OP, which is a mix of residential to the south and OP to the north adjacent to Popowell Road. On the future land use map, this area has recommended zones of R1C, RM2, RM3, NB, or OP. The master conceptual plan of Oak Trace and proposed zone change fit directly into the recommended zoning. To further emphasize this point, the housing options adjacent to the office and professional space and commercial retail meet goal number one of the comprehensive plan, which is to create quality neighborhoods. And specifically, objective B, which is to enable the development of mixed-use areas that will allow residents to walk short distances from home to destinations such as shopping to meet their daily needs. The master conceptual plan for what we're calling Oak Trace also includes, as you'll look closely, walking paths, biking paths, water features that use existing water on site. And then in that back, kind of the back corner, there is that event space that provides a terrace lawn with the goal of having restaurant and entertainment opportunities in addition to being a gathering space for the community. These features address goal number four of the comprehensive plan, which is to build a healthy community. Specifically, it addresses the following objectives, which is to expand access to walking and cycling, promote safety and connectivity of sidewalks, bike lanes, and trails, and to establish green space and open space for all new development projects. So goal number three is also to, it's addressed in the growing and diverse economy as Oak Trace provides that entertainment and other quality of life pieces that attract and retain a diverse workforce. The community does not, this community does not yet have this kind of mixed-use residential commercial development that are so popular in other places. One of the goals of this project would be to bring that kind of unique opportunity to Danville and Boyle County. The last section for the zone change then would be the immediately adjacent to 127 portion, which is highway commercial. Even though the future land use map recommends a zone that's central business or general business, the highway the highway commercial would be the most appropriate use, we believe, given that it's a hub of commercial retail activity, as shown by the traffic count of more than 20,000 vehicles a day on the bypass. The immediately adjacent property to Walmart which is zoned HB in this proposal is a reasonable expansion in that only seeks the appropriate number of acres to have the commercial retail site. The surrounding area is highway business and Oak Trace has gone to great lengths to try to create smooth and kind of gradual transitions from zone to zone and also to the existing adjacent agricultural properties. Goal five of the comprehensive plan is to preserve the community's resources and allocate an adequate supply of developable land to accommodate anticipated growth within the urban service area. We feel strongly that this development proposes a limited number of acres for commercial retail that is within the adequate supply necessary for the growth of the community. The standard of development utilized in Oak Trace meets the objective of minimizing the impact of farming activities and preserving the rural character by creating, as we keep saying, these gradual transitions from highway business. In order to approve a MAP amendment, KRS-113 requires the Commission to find that the MAP amendment is in agreement with the adoptive, adoptive, adopted, excuse me, comprehensive plan A copy of that particular statute is enclosed as a portion of the packet and marked as Exhibit C. It's our belief that the proposed plan is in agreement with the comprehensive plan that is in place based on the goals and objectives met by the proposal. And then just a couple more things in regards to the future land use map. As previously discussed, it identifies three different potential uses for the site. The first is the intersection there of 127 Popperwell Lane, which anticipates primarily commercial uses such as retail, office, personal services, and mixed uses with a commercial business or general business zone. The proposed plan that we presented to you incorporates that goal of providing commercial uses, but does so as highway business or office and professional. And again, those uses are properly aligned with comprehensive plans, goals, and objectives that are laid out. The remaining portion of the property on the future land use map has both residential zones, which are the R1A, R1B, R1C, RM2, and RM3, as well as those commercial zones that we've discussed. And it's largely satisfied by this proposal and incorporates RM2, RM3, and a small section of general business to serve as that clubhouse facility there in the back to serve the residential development portion of this. As determined by Kentucky law, we understand that the future land use map is merely one part of the comprehensive plan. and the actual text of the plan should be read holistically with the future land use map as a guide. So it's our position that the proposed development is in agreement with the text of the comprehensive plan by satisfying many of the goals and conditions and it meets the overall objectives proposed in the future land use map as the goals and objectives are clearly met by this proposal. So you have before you Just to lay out a couple of brief things. Goal number one, creating quality neighborhoods. Enable the development of mixed use areas that will allow residents to walk short distances from home to destinations that meet your daily needs. Encourage the use of neighborhood enhancing elements such as open space retention. street trees, roadway connectivity, neighborhood-serving businesses, and connections to community centers such as parks. Goal two is to expand those housing options and enable the production of affordable housing and a diverse housing stock, increase housing opportunities and supporting amenities such as for residents, again, to age in place. Goal three, grow a diverse economy, provide an entertainment and other quality of life opportunities that attract and retain a diverse workforce. As we've said, there's not anything like what's being proposed here in the area, certainly not in Danville or Boyle County currently. Goal four, build a healthy community, expand access to walking, cycling, and recreational facilities, promote safety and connectivity of roadways, sidewalks, bike lanes, and trails. and establish minimum standards for green space and open space. And the final goal there, preserve the community's resources, allocate an adequate supply of developable land to accommodate anticipated growth within the urban service area, and maximize development on vacant land within the urban service area. So just kind of to wrap it up and bring it to a close, the proposed use has been adequately described. The requirements of KRS have been met. It is in agreement, I think, with the comprehensive plan by meeting its goals and objectives. The future land use map contemplates various uses and zones, which is, again, supported by this proposed development. It'll be a mixed-use development with a combination of appropriate zones for highway commercial, office and professional, two-family residential, multi-family residential, and general business. The proposed master plan provides a well-balanced, multifaceted development that contains not only retail and commercial, but also professional office space, restaurants, town homes, apartments, single family, quad flex home sites, and then public cultural and parks space. A lot of work and careful attention has gone into this, and it's been focused in such a way to, you know, respect the nature of the property, create gradual and smooth transitions from zone to zone, and create a development that hopefully the community will support and be proud of. And then we've got, these folks can answer specific questions as far as pieces of our master plan.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you for you. You know it's laborious to go through that, but you've said some great items.

Well, it's hard to stand there and read the people, but I didn't know how else to do it.

Yeah, there's no good way.

Well, I think it helps the commission to understand which pieces are going to be moving to which zone change. So thank you very much. We appreciate it. Questions from the commissioners?

The concerns I have later, if I could ask the question on there, maybe you have the comment on there. You talk about the number of highway cars going up 20, down to 127. Yes. This is a tremendous expansion area on there. Do you personally have any concerns over the traffic patterns that would occur in this area?

Well, There has been a lot of working in- Please speak closer to the microphone. There has been discussions with the city of Danville extensively. And I'm not sure exactly who you all have worked through with that. But the roundabouts are something that was specifically suggested by the state and the city, if I understand correctly.

But that's part of the conceptual plan. It's not a final plan.

Right. My suggestion is why don't we let the rest of the proposal come and then I'm sure we have a lot of questions.

Okay.

Gentlemen.

As long as you introduce your names and addresses.

Yeah, please.

Hi, I'm Jeremy Shepherd with Oak Trace Development. 1660 Codwell Road, here in Danville, Boyle County.

Kelly Griffiths, 747 Clonch Road, Parable, Kentucky.

Cavill Chin, 574 O'Hare Drive.

Thank you, sir.

Dale Shepperson, AGE Engineering, 1370 Brumfield Road.

Thanks.

The plant? You want to look at the plant? Pop me up the plant, Hannah.

Keeping in mind, I'm like a lot of these guys. We've studied it to a point, but we have not seen it before this point in time.

Yeah, sorry. We'll try to be closer to the mics as well. And if you guys could make sure you're closer to the mics, that's better.

Thank you.

We're as loud as we can get. Is that OK?

Yeah, just make sure you stay close to the mic, because we're having a hard time hearing. Thank you.

I wanted him to pull up this.

I wanted them to pull up this plan because it specifically shows each boundary of the rezoning that we're wanting.

So for myself, I had to mark it up to be able to see what's what here. But this piece is highway business in the proposal.

Correct.

And then the piece behind it is RM3, this smaller piece. This is all RM2 Office Professional, is that OP up there?

Yes, it is Office Professional, OP.

Just for our sake and then for the community's sake to try to identify what does this mean, right? And to show you all what those areas are. It's hard for us to read the fine print. It was hard for me to read the fine print here. So it would be helpful to kind of describe through that.

Yeah, so the easiest way to do that is you see the red line right above the highway. Okay, go from the red line all the way up to the curved dashed line. Point that out, Terry, if you don't mind, the curved dashed line. Yes, right there. That would be all highway business from there to the red line. Right behind that would be professional office, R.M., To RM3. Correct. Correct. And then to the very east of the property, which Terry can't quite reach that high, but to the top of the page would be residential with that one corner in the most eastern part being general business for a clubhouse. RM3, RM2.

Why don't you tell them what RM3 is? It's multifamily.

GREG BRUDNICKI Right. Multi-family. RM3, RM2 is multi-family. GREG BRUDNICKI Correct. Correct. And that area right there is RM3. JENNA HALIGAS Thank you.

That's helpful.

All right, Hannah. Now if you could go back to the conceptual plan for me.

Thanks for the very detailed plan. You guys put a ton of work into this. This is good. What would be the impact to existing infrastructure? So there's 360-ish units, housing units going in, plus all these businesses, and it would be tied back to Danville City sewer. Is there... Does that meet the capacity, or would there be any upgrades to city sewer systems that would be necessary?

Well, I can't really speak to the upgrades of the city sewer, but whatever would have to take place as far as city utilities, they would have to work with the city in whatever we needed to be able to tie on in the appropriate spots.

OK. but the plan would be tied to city utilities and city.

Yes, they have been in conversation with Earl, Josh, the city about utilities, wherever they are and wherever they need to be.

Then the question and discussion about The discussions you've had already with the state around the highway and the increased traffic, can somebody talk to that and address what your proposal is thinking you're going to add to traffic?

Well, very general, I can discuss it because it's definitely still in the plan, still working on it. The state are meeting with the state officers and the city as well as the owners and us. We've had a couple meetings and we're having more about how to handle any increased traffic and what the state is going to require the developers to do. Uh, so yes, we've, like I say, we've had a couple meetings about it and there will be more in the future. Um, you know, so what, of course, 127's major, you know, so whatever the state says is what we're going to have to do.

Any other comments from you gentlemen?

Okay, we're good.

Thank you. Anyone else who wishes to speak besides these gentlemen who wishes to speak in favor of this application? if not then we're going to go on to anyone who has opposition to this gentleman raised his hand i'm sorry i missed it was there someone else who wanted to come in favor well mr ballard would you come forward and madam chair would it be appropriate at this time to begin the use of our three-minute public input timer Yes, please.

Okay. Yeah, just after that. Thank you. Well, let's look at the big picture here.

Mr. Ballard, you may speak as long as you need to ask questions and to provide your...

Thank you. Thank you. I'm friends with these guys. Well, Jeremy's wife worked for me. I will let my grandkids fish on this property. I have nothing personally against these guys, okay. I live out there. Jeremy did to work for me on my house, but This looks like Disneyland.

Speaking to that, please.

It looks like Disneyland, but the bottom line is they want to make money on this deal. Who wouldn't? In fact, I was in partial negotiations to buy that part back. Just to say we're doing it for the good of the community, that's not totally true. They're making money on the deal, just so you understand that. Secondly, That's 88 apartments back there, 23 single-family lots. You probably don't even need a lawnmower if you live there. To have some great community of kids running around in their yards, it's not going to happen. They'll be over on the farm is where they'll be playing. This came before zone change about 15 years ago. And it was voted down. And the reason was, well, I asked planning and zoning. I said, on a deal like this, do all the commissioners, so they're educated, do they get to go out and look at it? Oh, we always do that. Have any of y'all been out there? Yes. You have? Yes.

Yeah.

Yes. So you've walked the property?

No.

As much as you don't buy it.

Yes.

Okay.

You got to be straight.

All right. Well, if you walk the property, Mayor Bowling was out there and walked it, and I said, they're going to develop this into this. He goes, you got to be kidding me. He said, that should ruin all this back here, this farmland. So as far as fitting in with what's there, that's a pile of shovel, okay? The... As far as water runoff, I've never heard them address that. My field fuels that pond there. And with all that other stuff, if you walked it, you would know it. Land goes like that towards that pond where those lots are. That pond's going to fill up, and it's going to go back to my property. So I'm going to lose my back fields partly. uh my front fields were lost by walmart so and that was supposed to be addressed and tommy can talk about that but that was never an issue but this adds more water going down poplar well so it's going to make it worse you can't even drive up this driveway when it rains uh so i think an order of this magnitude time I read about how you fight planning and zoning if they're going to approve something. The first thing was to contact your neighbors. Mitch Clark lives across the street. He didn't even know about it. He's not physically there, but the signs are this big. I talked to two or three people. They go back and forth every day. They never saw a sign. People I've talked to on Ghost Pike, my neighbors up there, None of them knew about it. So this has to be educated. People need to know about these things on something this magnitude. Everybody that lives down at Junction has to drive up that way. And it's like, watch out. The cops are making a lot of money writing tickets right now. So you know. Other people want to talk, I'm going to take a bit more time.

Yes, other folks would like to make comments, too.

But I would. Planning and zoning, they told me you all have been over the whole property. So I thought, well, I don't need to talk to them about it. But something like this, I think you should.

Thank you, sir. Is Tom Mills here?

Tom Mills, 800 Popowell Lane. I'm going to start out the same way Peter did. I've got very close friends standing up here beside me, some favorite students that I'm also very proud that have come up here and already talked from Boyle County. So I respectfully am in opposition to the zoning map amendments under consideration. Start out with the letter I received. said the land was 1,136 acres. That was a notification sent out for those of us that did get it. That's inconsistent with long established boundary records and inconsistent with what you put up there. So we received inaccurate information about this project. Also, the plat sheet is a very old plat sheet and does not have at least one proper owner property on the border. Actually, it's Peter's, actually. So I would request that the commission, I'm sure you've already done it, require a verified survey and correct the information that's been sent out on the notification for this meeting. I talked with one person, an older lady that lives close by. I guess she got a letter. And she was convinced that it was 1,100 acres. And that's incorrect. Proceeding with a zoning amendment based on incorrect acreage in the hands of us, the owners, would be, I would think, procedurally unsound and could invalidate the action. My house is located on Popowell Lane. And it has a single entrance that goes across a small bridge across the creek. Before Walmart was put there, I never had a flood issue at all of getting across that little creek up to my house. Since Walmart's been there, my house, my bridge floods multiple times during the year where I cannot get off my property or back into my property. It's flash flooding, so it doesn't take long probably for it to go down, two or three hours. But still, I have that hazard. And it never was before Walmart was there. So that's one project that's been built around me that I've dealt with now for almost 40 years. Any development that increases runoff or alters the drainage patterns or modifies the stream bed would worsen flooding and could render my property more inaccessible. This raises serious concerns for safety, emergency access. What's that?

The three minute timer's expired.

Please go ahead, sir.

OK, thank you. Yeah, thank you. but raises serious concerns for safety, emergency access, and property rights. The proposed zoning changes would introduce dense residential and commercial uses, including banks, roundabouts, multifamily housing, into an area currently zoned agriculture. And there's no way that you can't tell me that this development isn't going to affect traffic. And then my road of Popowell, right now I have two accesses out of Popowell. One is Brenda Avenue, where the roundabout is on the top left going to be. My livelihood is cattle farm. Will I be able to get a semi with a pot behind it, cattle pot behind it, around that, and in and out, plus basically shutting down Papa oil going to 127. It comes up and routes you through Cheddar's and Walmart to get out to 127. So emergency evacuation for me and other family members that live in there and friends could become very difficult. The surrounding infrastructure is not designed to support this level of development. That highway, roundabout up there, 127 going in either direction. And for me to go now, if I want to go to Hardee's for breakfast, I've got to come up and go through Cheddar's and all that and circle back and go down around the route, so I'm probably not going to go to Junction anymore unless it's an emergency. I think that would hamper people going both ways, into Danville and out of Danville. On 127, that's a major highway that's been there for hundreds of years. The scale and intensity of the proposed uses are just incompatible with the rule character and would create traffic noise and environmental impacts that extend far beyond subject property. I have experienced these impacts each time a project has been developed in my area. As of right now, I am dealing with damage to my property due to the project behind Cattleman's and will be glad to share those issues with you personally if you so desire. I have a hard time believing that with, I don't know how many houses are going in that development, but I've been told that along my fence row are gonna be 94 houses, right on my fence row. Do we need to additional these on the other side of our farm? For these reasons, the inaccurate notifications, the safety risks, incompatible land use, and potentially economic harm to the area, I respectfully ask the commission to delay the zoning map, to deny the zoning map amendments. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. I appreciate it.

Do we have a Mary Beth Ballard Murray?

Hi, thank you. My name is Mary Beth Ballard-Murray. I've been in this community for 30 years with my family. I live at 516 Popplewell. My family and I have been a part of the community, and our family farm means a lot to us. And the beauty of Boyle County cannot be understated. I'm convinced we live in one of the most beautiful areas in the Commonwealth. We were surprised to receive a letter about this zoning change and had no knowledge of it prior to 10 days ago. The letter stated that 1,136.5 acres was going to be developed. So we were confused about that amount and that was a great error if that is not the case. My family and I are asking that this zoning change be tabled for a later date for us to get more information, for you all to get more information, to understand the proposed project, the implications, and to give us time to secure appropriate legal representation if needed. We are very much proud owners of our property and our neighbors, and we have great relationships with people in the community. I've worked at the Arts Center, Grace Cafe, and now Center College, so I care a lot about our community, and I want it to develop in a safe and appropriate way. So I'd love to work with everyone here on this. I appreciate your consideration of giving us more time, as we truly care about everything here, the natural beauty of our city and county, and our family farm. Thank you so much. Thank you.

So I have a couple of other names here, but I think that it's possible that they may be speaking to another issue. Ed Vander, is this related to this issue? Okay, thank you. Dr. White, is this related to this issue? Yes. Come forward please.

Shelby White, 1127 Ghost Pike. And this is one more development affecting us. I feel like we're under attack at Ghost Pike. They're coming at us from all sides. But the main thing, I have a future land use map, and it's my understanding that that little square at the top on the future land use map is low density housing. Does anybody confirm that? Hanna, could we see the flume? Is that? But if my interpretation is correct, I think they're asking you to ignore the future comprehensive plan land map.

For the audience, can you identify what these are?

Yes. So in your staff reports as well, So this is the pink area right there is Village Neighborhood. The orange area is Village Center. And then the yellow area that is butted out is Garden Neighborhood. And so the recommended zoning for those for those villages are R1C, RM2, RM3, neighborhood business, office and professional, central business, and general business. The only thing that is not in compliance with the future land use map is the fact that they did highway business on the front of Houstonville Road, but it is similar to the central business, neighborhood business designations.

But I think according to that map, that little square comes out of that area into the yellow.

Yes, that is Garden Neighborhood.

Yes. So is that not a change to the future use map?

That is R1A. That is suggested use R1A. So single family.

Right. Low density family housing is what it says on my map. And they want to change it to general business and a clubhouse. It's my understanding that you can't change the comprehensive plan unless there's some specific reason to do it, like inappropriate zoning or something has changed in the neighborhood.

Didn't hear that, but I think the commission is aware that the statutory requirements are show comp plan conformity. If there is none, look at whether there have been major changes or look at whether the current zoning is inappropriate.

Does that answer the commission's question?

Thank you.

All right. Which one is it? Is it inappropriate or been major changes?

Madam Chair, I'll answer the gentleman's question, which is that the findings we've been provided with argue that this proposal conforms to the comp plan, and so they don't then need to address inappropriate zoning or major changes. They're arguing conformity.

There was the purpose of a comprehensive plan. But it's not.

And that's your argument to make, sir, and that the board, the commission will consider that and it will play into their decision.

And Dr. Blake, that's what- It seems like it's just factual.

You got a map, you got a line on it.

I don't understand how you can fudge on it. So, Hannah, garden neighborhood- Yes. Zones.

Garden Neighborhood is the R1A suggested zone. When we passed that in the future land use map with the comp plan back in October, it originally was R1A and RM2, but we removed that RM2 designation. So originally when I believe they probably started this plan, it was Garden Neighborhood was R1A and RM2. So both single and multifamily.

OK.

So the main reason that this is being looked at, that corner, a little corner that you're talking about, is because of the clubhouse that would serve the neighbors who are in that area. Is that my understanding? Yes.

That doesn't sound low-density housing to me, though.

Question for Hannah, too. The area that we're looking at, is that all inside this?

So it's inside what you went around, and then that bottom square that's yellow? Right there, yes. So all of that together.

So that's the question that's being raised?

Yes, only the yellow portion, I believe, is what we're...

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for bringing that forward. Are there others who wish to speak on this who have signed up to speak?

It looks like most everybody that signed in today was to speak about a different agenda item. So is there anybody that signed up? Did anybody that signed up earlier on the sign-in sheet want to speak about this agenda item, or was that only about another agenda item? I'm pretty sure it was about the other agenda item. So nobody that signed up today.

Okay. Sir, I believe you wanted to come forward.

My name is Mitchell Clark. I live across the street from this. This is going... I have a hard time believing that this is in our best interest. It certainly, I won't speak for my own personal interest, but it doesn't fit the area. The houses that are there now certainly don't represent anything that's been proposed in this thing at all. So you're gonna change that. My family does have some history with, Being next to a neighborhood, dealing with children, dealing with dogs, dealing with dead animals as dogs run in packs, these are all things that you better expect is gonna happen and somebody's gonna have to deal with. I probably have the biggest problem with highway commercial. I really have a problem with that. I live on that road. I can attest to the traffic that's on that road. Anything that slows and impedes that traffic at this point, simply I don't think is a good idea for this community, period. Whether it's another additional stoplight or what we have on that map, both of these things I think would not make sense in the long run. At night, I can envision what my place will look like with that much more light in the sky. Now, you all are gonna help me not be able to find a star in the sky. I don't know how that's a great thing for Danville, much less for me. I haven't heard anyone address the gas lines that I'm pretty sure run through there, because they sure cross the street and run through me. No one seems to be talking about the gas lines. Maybe they're not important. I don't know, but there's a lot of things detail-wise. My family has developed part of the property on the bypass and there's a lot of conversation that I'm not hearing today that should already been addressed before this or this board would have required my father to have had all these studies in front of them. Well, I don't hear about any of this now. So half-baked and we're not sure and we'll make it up as we go or kind of like pass the bill and you'll find out what's in it afterwards. It's something I certainly don't want to entertain if I can help it. Respectably, I'm glad for the time to share this with you all, but I feel like we need a whole lot more information. And I feel like it really does impact the adjacent land owners that are around this. It certainly will impact me, and anything that slows the traffic down coming into Danville, I don't think is a good idea by any stretch. And you all, I hope, will have some more time to walk that property to understand how close this is. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir. Would anyone else like to speak to this issue, this application? Do you want to speak to the gas line issue that he brought forward? You'll have to bring the microphone up. I'm sorry. It's okay.

As you can see, if you can see where it says Highway 127 on the actual road, if you'll go right, yes, go right about two inches. Thank you, Darren. Right there. Right there. Now you see a grass strip that goes pretty much straight up. all the way through the property. Just keep going straight.

No, no.

Yes, yes, there's a gas line that goes right through there and that, that, that we will be staying off any gas line easements. We, we understand that there are gas lines that go through this property, just like the majority of the property in this area. And we will, we will, Work with the gas lines as much as you can. They're not the most pleasant people to work with, but you can work with them. So yes, we will do that.

Thank you.

Yes. Again, this is a zone change. This is not a plat or a final plan as far as that concern. We will address the water. as the engineers cannot let any more water flow over the neighbor's property more than what is now. They know that they have to control that. That will be addressed. All this stuff about uh wishing and you know that's not happening. Everything is fact. We, they study, they study the topo of the property. They make the adjustments that they need to make in order for everything to flow the same way that it is today.

Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else who would like to speak to this issue? Yes, sir. You'll have to come forward. Sorry.

I'm still Tom Mills, Papa Will Lane. Understand. I guess this question's for Robbie, because just the bitching on the pipeline. WILL THERE BE ANY BLASTING ON THIS PROPERTY? BECAUSE WE'RE GOING THROUGH THAT RIGHT NOW WITH THE PROJECT BEHIND CATTLEMAN'S. BECAUSE IT'S HILLY. I MEAN, IT'S NOT LABOR.

I CAN'T TELL YOU 100% NO, THAT THERE WILL NOT BE ANY BLASTING. I'M SURE THE DEVELOPERS AND THE OWNER, IF THERE'S ANY WAY TO STAY AWAY FROM BLASTING, THEY WILL. SO I CAN'T TELL YOU 100%, BUT WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT.

We're really concerned about the blasting going on now. I understand. Because it runs right beside all of our properties. Okay. Thank you, sir.

All right. Let's have discussion amongst the commissioners or questions.

Are you closing in public here? Are we doing this?

We're doing this in public here.

okay any discussion any further questions of the commissioners madam chair i want to bring up one item that was mentioned by a couple of speakers which was the notices in the acreage listed on those notices i took a look at what was mailed out and the requirements of these notices is that we provide something that allows the public to identify the property i'll tell you that the notice lists the owners And from that, you can look on the PVA and see what the parcels are. It also lists the adjoining roads that are on there. So that's the information they've been provided. If the commission wished to, they could issue supplementary notices that correct that acreage. And I think maybe you might also want to hear from applicant's counsel if he has any position on whether or not to issue supplemental notices. But I'm telling you that I think it does identify the property, which is what we're required to do.

Further questions or comments? Yes, Ms. Douglas.

Ms. Chair.

You'll have to bring the microphone down a little bit.

This might pertain more to the site plan and the zone change, but what Mr. Clark brought up, the lighting. It's going to be immense through there. It looked to be as big as a prison. And everybody knows how it's lit up. So I'm just saying it's going to be something to see coming through there. Is it going to bother the traffic or the people living there or going to light the sky up? That's all I have to say.

If you're going to have a conversation, we need it on the microphone, if you want it recorded.

That's all I have. Thank you, Rita.

I'll be brief. I just feel like that if you all decide to go ahead with this, then we're going to sign up for some form of this. And the skyline at night is definitely going to change. And that'll be 24 hours a day. Those lights are going to be on. That's going to completely change. The other thing that concerns me that we're not talking much about is that we're gonna leave it up to the state to figure out what to do with the traffic. But we're the ones that are doing this. And I haven't seen the state get the traffic right often. So we're gonna deal with this, or me, if I live across the street, I'm gonna take a tractor down two of these turnarounds. I hope I don't get run over before I get to the other end of the property. There's a lot of things that I feel like, are probably not all the way thought through. But the amount of light at night is something I can't get around for. And I've lived out there. We've been there since 1946. So we've watched damble change an awful, awful lot with the bypass and all of that. there's more light out there now than there ever used to be. And what you all are proposing here will be where you decide can I afford to stay here or am I gonna be forced to leave just because of how much of an impact it has been. And this farmland that we, are trying to decide whether or not we want to leave it that way. I don't see how that really conforms or blends in with what's there. I would love to hear more information, more ideas, something else, but I certainly hope that you guys will we'll take a methodical step with this to try to see if you all can't get all the ducks in a row that helps this community understand why this is a good idea. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Okay. Any further questions or discussions by the commissioners?

The comment, I've heard a lot of great things, guys, folks. The ideal of traffic patterns, the lighting, the water flows on a 100 and, what do we got here? 136? 133. 133 acres is always going to be a concern. And absolutely, that has to be addressed. What we're being asked for today is to look at the rezoning of that area. And this is the starting point to make this avenue of activity go. And we got some great comments by the people on that category, too, that tell me that I need to go back and look at the documents and look at the information as where I'm at, Madam Chair, Chairman, on this particular one. I need to step back and look at these things and absorb it before I can go and say a direction that I would like to consider going.

and i'm sorry i would also uh sorry i don't remember your name um i just i i i really appreciated her comments around uh just providing a little bit more time to digest

all of this information and i think it's been great comments from both public and and the applicants presentation uh there's just a lot to consider yeah i i'm kind of in that same boat i mean in when we think about um consistency with what we said in the comp plan and the flume to me this is kind of there it's kind of consistent with what we've said we want to do However, it's a lot of information in front of us at one time with not a lot of notice. And I think it's fair to say to the community that we take some time to consider that. I'm kind of of that mind.

We can talk about all the other ancillary issues that come up. One thing that's not going to change and not going to get better is traffic. They're not going to be able to manage the traffic flow. Even if they put a couple roundabouts in there, it's going to back all the way up from the bypass. It will. So you can't manage that. You can't rezone that. You can't eliminate a gas line. You're going to have the traffic. You're going to have the life, as Mitch said. So I just don't see a way to do that. You can postpone it all you want to. Reconsider this. Those things aren't going to change.

MIKE PATTERSON Well, it is fairly consistent with the comprehensive plan. This is the way I look at it, though. And we can talk about it, but from my standpoint, it does look like it's pretty consistent with what we've said during the comprehensive plan development that we want to do with this part of the town.

Right. And it has some very attractive features in terms of the proposal for the development. So it could add... walking, biking, opportunities that are not existing today. All of that stuff is attractive, but I would guess I propose that we give it some time.

So I'm ready to accept a motion.

Do you have any comments? Did you guys need to say anything else, add anything? So I'd move that we table this. to allow us a little bit more time to consider all of the documentation in front of us and to better inform the community and allow community input at one more meeting before we would approach approval of this.

Can I get a second?

I second.

Thank you.

TO THE MOVEMENT IN SECOND. I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE TO ATTACH TO THAT MOTION THE REISSUANCE OF PUBLIC NOTICE CORRECTING THE AGREED ISSUE. YES, PLEASE.

YES, PLEASE, HENRY.

AND I ALSO JUST WANT TO ASK STAFF IF THERE ARE ANY STAFF ITEMS OF CONCERN WHICH ARE LISTED IN PAGE 12 OF YOUR STAFF REPORT WHICH NEEDED ADDRESSING. I'M LOOKING PARTICULARLY AT THE WATER SEWER FLUG PLANE VERIFICATION LETTER, WHICH I DIDN'T SEE WAS INCLUDED WITH THE APPLICATION. And are there any staff concerns that you want to pinpoint maybe for supplementing?

Right. Are there staff concerns specifically that we could address by DeWay?

I think that water sewer floodplain verification, getting that by next month would be helpful. But everything else we've discussed in tech review, and that's already ongoing. The traffic study contingency by KYTC, the drainage documentation, the multi-use path was touched on earlier, and the Hoppewell and Stubb Street realignments. So I think that drainage documentation and water sewer floodplain verification I think would be helpful. Thank you.

So we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor of the motion, please raise your hand. Opposed? Thank you. This will be tabled until our next meeting to be discussed. And for the need of the chair, we will take a 10 minute break. and then we'll be back to the next item. And to item number four in the public hearings, Ms. Gray.

You can have this one.

Yes.

I just had all the papers.

All right. Stoneland LLC has applied for a zoning map amendment of their 48.592 acre parcel of land along Kentucky Highway 33, Shaker Town Road in Danville from agriculture to single-family R1C, single-family duplex RM2, and general business. This is south of the DCA, and it's currently zoned agriculture. And the flume is for garden neighborhood, village neighborhood, village center, and conservation.

Director, do you have a... Does it touch the DCA property? No, no, no.

It doesn't go... It's south of the DCA and the roundabout on Highway 2144, but it doesn't go all the way up.

That's what I thought when I looked at it.

And it is... compared to where the radio station is?

South of the radio station as well.

Further south of that.

In my staff report, we discuss the comprehensive plan review and the proposed zone change is in compliance with the following 2025 comprehensive plan goals and objectives and in compliance with the 2025 future land use map to create quality neighborhoods expand housing options, grow a diverse economy, and preserve community resources. Additionally our staff items of concern were similar to the last agenda item traffic study contingency with the KYTC Stub Street connections and sharing multiple access points to shaker town road and reducing future traffic congestion pedestrian links if possible on track 41 a preservation of the rock wall that is around that tract of land And we suggested in tech review, we had a discussion of creating a pedestrian path along that rock wall and around the perimeter of the garden and village neighborhood designations to provide an attractive walking path. And then, additionally, a vegetation buffer around that rock wall as well to reduce people and then uh drainage detention plan and flooding concerns was discussed at tech review as well and so director can you talk about the track 41a pedestrian link so we understand yes um so on that stack or on the uh plat it is in your um staff reports um it shows a tracked 41a left of 42 and to the right of 41 and we did some research on that tract a and it um it is not owned by anybody so we were hoping that that could be turned into a pedestrian connectivity um to this neighborhood into streamland and so that would be where the entrance to the walking path would be theoretically and that's a request by the city that's a request just in tech review of you know we just wanted to abide by our comp plan and include walking paths as much as possible, and especially since that rock wall is historic and it won't be torn down.

Yeah, that's right. It would be right adjacent to the rock wall.

So just kind of a suggestion during tech review with conversations with the city.

So are you saying that you think that should be conditions upon the zone change?

if that is something the commission sees fit.

Yeah, I think we get to decide then or recommend that.

And we also asked for that topographic plat and so that is included in your staff reports as well.

There's some slope on this property, you're saying?

Yes, yeah. And again, in Tech Review, we discussed having that pedestrian paseo from 41A, that track. But we also discussed stub streets from the north to Brook Cove to connect to that, from Brook Cove Drive to connect to Stoneland and reduce traffic congestion. I would also like to note that there were some discussions on Facebook about this LLC being connected to a potential data center in Boyle County, and that is not true at all. This is not connected to any other development or any data center at all in Boyle County.

The zoning couldn't facilitate. There's nothing about this that could relate to that. It was just a specious rumor.

Do you have anything else?

Do you have a way of tracking where the zoning, how many acres are associated with each zoning?

Yes, that is in your staff reports as well. Sorry, I did not provide that on the presentation, but it is in your staff reports.

Do you have the numbers to read out loud?

Yes. There is 10.573 acres designated to R and 2. 24.219 acres designated R1C on the left side of the plat. I believe 9.111 acres designated to neighborhood business, which is that orange designation right there. And then 3.7 acres designated to general business, or sorry, neighborhood business.

Yeah, so the general business is very small.

Yes, yeah, it is in that right-hand corner up at the north. And I will say there is, in that neighborhood business, there is the 100-year floodplain as well. So we discussed that in Tech Review.

Yeah, that's, and there's, as I said, there's a lot of water.

Do you have anything? Let's hear from the applicant please.

I'm Will Stevens with Advantage Engineering and I'm the applicant's engineer and surveyor for this project. Their attorney is Justin Manning and he's here to present a argument to demonstrate appropriateness. of the zone change. I just wanted to go ahead and address a couple of the things that Hannah had brought up while it was fresh on everybody's minds that were technical aspects. The lot 41A that's in Streamland, all land is owned by someone. It's either owned by the public or it's owned by a private entity. In this case, the PVA identifies the owner as the owner of lot 41. The owner of Lot 41, in fact, has a shed on 41A. They've been using it as though it's theirs as far back as we can see. It was designated as a lot on the original plat for that section of Streamland. The only note about that lot was that it can't be used for residential purposes. It was not designated as a public right-of-way on that plat. This is me speaking as a surveyor. I just want to point that out that we have zero control as Stone Land LLC over 41A. We cannot control what happens to it. I think that there are legal issues to assume that you can just put a trail on it with no opposition, no process. I think that if the city wants to pursue that, right to pursue eminent domain or to try to find out more definitively its status, but we don't want any sort of condition on our zone change regarding property that we have no control over. And as far as the trails, the applicant is 100% in agreement with trying to expand trail access, trail usage. we do not support having a trail. What Hannah was talking about is potentially having a trail along the northern boundary of Streamland, so our southern boundary. There's a rock wall along most of that. If we were to put a public trail there, it would be, perceptively in the backyards of everyone in Streamland, as well as the backyards of a row of housing in our development. That would decrease privacy for both housing developments you can screen it it will take decades to have some sort of effective screen to restore privacy we think that we can support trail development by having sidewalks on all of our streets on both sides just as your eggs stipulate and we want to connect to Brook Cove we're going to extend the street into Brook Cove and you can see street stubs there's three street stubs to the north all of which would support extending the trail network because you're heading towards the trail that's on the bypass. So I just kind of wanted to get ahead of that discussion because that was kind of what we discussed at Tech Review and I don't want to make it seem as though we're trying to develop a trail network that's immediately adjacent to a bunch of existing housing. So that's all I wanted to say right now. I'm sure you'll have Technical questions later.

Thank you.

Can I ask the question between the two of you while you're paused? Yes. You're telling me then track 41A is OK, but not a walkway next to the rock wall?

We're saying that we have no control over it. We don't own it.

On 41A?

Yes. Okay. To the best of my knowledge, it's not been designated as a public private play, and it has been treated as though it's part of private land owned by a homeowner in the street.

Okay. It's down here in the corner. It's down here in the corner. I was just trying to get the staff recommendation so I understand which one.

Thank you. It's that little sliver that is adjacent to 42 and 41.

We can't hear what you're saying, your conversation.

No one here knows whether it's 41 and 42 is what the comment is. So we're trying to determine what is 41A and what is 42 on the map.

Thank you, sir. This is 41. This is what, 41A?

41A.

This is the one they're talking about.

It's a little bitty thing.

Thank you, sir.

Based on the history of that plat.

We have the same question, so that's good. Thank you.

Based on the history of that plat, nobody owns it, but...

That's an easement on my property I've taken care of for 25 years.

And to Hannah's point, no one owns it. If, in fact, no one owns it, then the last person to own it owns it, which would be the original developer of Streamland. But like I say, there's all kinds of legal implications to land ownership and how you acquire it. So I'm not here to dispute, you know, I just don't want it to be perceived as though there's this ready-made public right-of-way for use, because that's not the case.

I just needed to know whether we were going to address it, how we're going to address it, since it's a staff item on the list. And when you're ready, if you're coming in to speak a little later, you can give us more information. Ma'am, go right ahead. We got you involved. Sorry.

That's perfectly fine. All right, I prepped this to say good morning, but good almost afternoon at this point. My name is Justin Manning, and I represent the applicant, Stoneland, LLC, regarding the requested zone map amendment for approximately 46.7 acres located along Shaker Town Road. The applicant is requesting a rezoning from agriculture to four districts, approximately 2.8 acres of general business, approximately 9.1 acres of neighborhood business, approximately 10.5 acres of two-family residential district, which is RM2, and approximately 24.2 acres of single-family residential, which is R1C. This application is straightforward because the requested zoning directly implements the framework already established by the recently adopted comp plan and future land use map. As you're aware, the Comp Plan deals largely with villages and broader development patterns when discussing land use rather than rigid zoning districts. This is because the Comp Plan and FLUME are intended to function as long-range planning tools establishing desired growth patterns, transitions, and development character, while the precise zoning classifications and boundaries are later refined through the zoning and development review process. The future land use map specifically identifies this property for garden neighborhood, village neighborhood, and village center development patterns, all of which expressly contemplate the zoning classifications applicant is requesting. The comp plan specifically identifies the property within the Brook Cove village growth area and contemplates village center development as a hub of neighborhood activity supporting commercial and moderate density mixed use development. Applicants' request for approximately 2.8 acres of general business directly along Shaker Town Road mirrors that vision and logically places neighborhood serving commercial uses along the corridor where the flume anticipates them. The comp plan also identifies village neighborhood uses on the property, which contemplate predominantly residential development with limited neighborhood serving commercial uses. Applicant's request for approximately 9.1 acres of neighborhood business and 10.5 acres of RM2 directly aligns with those flume designations. And finally, the flume designates much of the property as a garden neighborhood, which primarily contemplates single family residential development. Applicant's request for approximately 24.2 acres of R1C mirrors that designation and provides an appropriate lower intensity transition adjacent to the existing residential areas. All zones requested by applicant are primary or secondary zones for the villages identified by the comp plan for this property and the future land use map. Therefore, importantly, this is not a case where the applicant is asking this commission to disregard or depart from the comp plan. Instead, applicant is simply asking you all to implement the exact growth pattern and land use transitions and concepts already adopted via the comp plan by this very planning commission and local legislative bodies. This matters. The comp plan is not simply an aspirational document. It is the product of years of study, public input, demographic analysis, infrastructure planning, transportation review, and coordinated work between multiple public agencies, all with the goal of creating what is essentially a development guide for the applicable jurisdictions, the playbook. The entire purpose of requiring the comp plan to be drafted, revised, and revisited regularly is to ensure that long-term land use decisions are guided by coordinated public planning rather than piecemeal or arbitrary zoning decisions. This is why it's the primary basis for approval of any zone map amendment. The legislature has recognized that the comp plan represents the community's officially adopted vision for future growth, infrastructure, and development. Once again, it's the playbook. And that is exactly what applicant is requesting. Applicant's request directly adheres to the exact vision the comp plan sees for this property. The future land use map itself is described as the cornerstone of the comp plan. And that's why we made exhibit A, which is actually what you're seeing up there, of our justifications, the overlay of this future land use map onto applicant's development plan. The consistency is very apparent. Applicant's proposal reflects a rational and orderly transition of uses across the property. As briefly touched upon, the neighborhood serving commercial uses are concentrated directly along Shaker Town Road. And as you progress west further away from Shaker Town, the proposal includes mixed residential and then less intense neighborhood commercial uses. And lastly, over half of the property is proposed as lower intensity single family residential adjacent to existing residential areas. This is not accidental. This is the type of coordinated planning specifically contemplated by the comp plan. It describes this type of transition zoning as desirable. It also specifically states that commercial uses should be strategically located on the fringes of neighborhoods and that multifamily residential can serve as a transition between commercial and lower density residential development When addressing this type of transitional zoning and uses, the comp plan specifically identifies the Brook Cove Village where our property exists as an area where the drafters would like to encourage such transitional zoning. That is verbatim from the comp plan itself. It's easy to see why the comp plan makes these designations and conclusions. The property is physically well suited for this type of development. It fronts a major transportation corridor. It has access to necessary and required utilities. It's within city limits. It can access and expand existing roadway infrastructure. The comp plan specifically identifies the property as a prime location for future collector streets and expanded connectivity. This demonstrates the property has been identified as an anticipated growth area rather than an isolated or premature development location. Also, just to make sure that the record is complete, I do want to briefly address a traffic impact study. This was brought up at the TRC meeting. The ordinances specifically allow flexibility regarding traffic impact studies following consultation with the relevant agencies. My understanding is that those discussions have already occurred through the TRC review process. Regardless, applicant remains fully willing to comply with any traffic analysis, roadway improvements, or access requirements ultimately required by KYTC or other reviewing agencies during subsequent development review and permitting. Importantly, I believe KYTC remains independent authority over roadway access permits and insurance approvals along Shaker Town Road and any future development of the property will remain subject to those requirements. So therefore, at this stage, you are primarily being asked to determine whether the requested zoning classifications are appropriate and whether they are consistent with the comp plan. And we believe the record clearly demonstrates they are. Applicant's request directly advances numerous goals and objectives of the comp plan. It supports the plan's goals relating to creation of quality neighborhoods, mixed-use development, housing diversity, roadway connectivity, neighborhood serving businesses, coordinated infrastructure planning, and orderly long-term growth management. To try and be as quick and succinct as I can, I'm not gonna read verbatim goals and objectives back to you. But goal one regards creating quality neighborhoods. Applicant zone map amendment directly advances this goal by creating an orderly and compatible transition of existing land uses across the property. Lower intensity residential districts are intentionally located adjacent to the existing residential development, while the more intense mixed residential and neighborhood serving commercial uses are concentrated along that Shaker Town Road corridor. This graduated development pattern encourages conformity with surrounding neighborhood character while simultaneously implementing the future growth framework contemplated and directed by the flume. Goal two regards expanding housing options. The requested zone map amendment directly advances the comp plans objective of promoting affordable housing opportunities and a more diverse housing stock by allowing for a mixture of residential housing types and densities across the property. Rather than limiting the property exclusively to large lot single family development, the requested zoning classifications create opportunities for a broader range of housing options capable of serving residents at varying income levels, household sizes, and stages of life. The proposal also supports the comp plan's goal of enabling residents to age in place by encouraging integrated residential development patterns and neighborhood serving amenities within close proximity to future housing opportunities. This is exactly why that whole theory behind villages is developed and implemented within that comp plan. Goal three regards growing a diverse economy. Applicant's request implements mixed residential and neighborhood serving developments, creating a framework contemplated by the comp plan and the FLUME. This supports continued economic growth and workforce attraction within Danville and Boyle County. The comp plan repeatedly emphasizes the importance of creating connected, walkable, and mixed-use neighborhoods capable of supporting a growing and diverse workforce, and this proposed development pattern contributes toward that objective by creating opportunities for integrated residential development, neighborhood-scale commercial activity, and enhanced community connectivity along that major transportation corridor. And lastly, goals four and five both speak to building healthy new communities while still preserving vital resources. Importantly, I want to point out that the only connectivity that we currently have or that are proposed is off of Brook Cove. Brook Cove just goes south, immediately touches back into Shaker Town Road. None of this immediately connects into what is existing as the Streamland development already. And so with that, if I can find my spot here. For all of those reasons, those goals and objectives, what I've gone over with the comp plan, the future land use map, I think it's very clear that we put together this exhibit to specifically show that once that 2025 comp plan came through, marked this property as such, that's when this application was started to put together. For all of those reasons, we respectfully request that the Planning Commission recommend approval of our zone map amendment. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this zone change? Okay, I'm gonna open it up to those who might like to speak against this zone change, and I believe I have Ed Vanderteams. Thank you, sir. Sorry, I couldn't read your name.

I'm here to just address the concerns of a lot of the residents, both of Brook Cove and Stringland. We did have a petition go around that was signed. I'd like to present to the committee. Most of our concerns are pretty much the same as the last plaque that we saw. This is nowhere near the scale of that, but all the concerns are relatively the same. The impact on the community. We have a very close-knit community there. The neighborhood will be affected both by cohesion and liability of what's going to come up with this. The traffic and safety. I don't know how many of you all travel Shaker Town Road up in that area, but the traffic is crazy. This would make it even worse, especially with any businesses that plan on coming. It was bad enough once the school was completed up there. The road there is very narrow. There's no shoulders. If the only access is coming through Brook Cove, I live on Brook Cove. I'm the last house on the right that borders this property. That road is not very wide. If that's gonna be a major entrance to this new property, we're gonna have a whole lot of problems there. Just property values in themselves. I'm sure we decline due to the type of businesses and things that are gonna be expanding over there. There's also a flood plain. I don't know if anybody knows right there's a creek on the right side. That floods every time we have a major storm. A lot of times it will back up to my yard. I can't imagine what it would be like if they start building over there. I've also had questions about the existing sewer system and if the pump station up there on Spears Lane is going to handle all this or if it's going to be planned on being upgraded. and who's gonna pay for those upgrades. There's also a right-of-way right there at the end of Brook Cove leading to this property. It was my understanding that there's a 50-foot right-of-way, but I don't know if it actually runs right up to the adjacent property or not. I'm not sure who owns that right-of-way, but I was hoping that would be something I'd be looked into. I'm not sure about this walkway that they're talking about. My property is adjacent to that rock wall. I'm not sure where this walkway was going to be on what side of the rock wall they're planning on. Hopefully, it's not coming up to my property.

Time. Three minutes time. Yes, sir.

Did he have three minutes time?

The applicant gets to present the application. These are, yeah.

Sir, go ahead.

Thank you.

With the school traffic the way it is, any more business traffic, if you have any kind of major kind of trucks coming down those roads, it'll be chaos. There's people cycling up and down that road constantly. They will definitely be at risk. A lot of children coming from the school will also be at risk. It's just not a good fit for the neighborhood. That petition I had signed around, it was just about everyone from Brook Cove, several people from Streamland, all worried about, like they said, the lighting, just the immense traffic and the people. We all moved there for one reason, on Brook Cove, and that was because it was a quiet, dead-end street adjacent to farmland. We really hate to see all this disappear. That's really about all I have, I guess. I'll let some other people come. I'm sure there's a lot of people here wanting to touch on this subject. Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

There are some other folks who wanted to speak. Yes. We will go in order. The first one up is John Harris.

All right, thank you. My name is John Harris. I've been a resident Boyle County about 30 years. Lived a resident at Brooke Cove for 26.

Can you state your address, sir?

116 Brooke Cove.

Thank you.

What uh, I'm going to read this because my wife asked me to read this to you.

You better do that.

Always do what your wife does.

She wrote this to formally express our opposition to the proposed zoning change. As a member of the community since 1996 and a resident of Brook Cove Drive since 2000, I'm concerned that the proposed change would negatively impact our neighborhood and surrounding community. Specifically, the rezoning would increase the traffic, the noise, the congestion, and overall strain on the infrastructure. Behind our house sits the gas station there on Brook Cove on 33. We all know it's not very well maintained. It's grown up. It's a horrible location. We'd really welcome more of that there. Behind my house, okay, I'm sorry. It is overgrown. We have a bridge there. We've had trouble with the bridge before having to be maintained. The water that runs through there is a major tributary into Lake Harrington. So all the water flow that comes from Stream 1, Brook Cove area is major and the field next to Mr. Vander Team's there that this property is on has been covered completely in water in years past. So in addition to that, we know that our property values are gonna go down when they start adding duplexes and the single houses and stuff there. That's a very big concern of ours. You know, many residents chose the area because of its unique location, such as we did. We were able to raise our children in there without worrying about people running out behind cars and being overcrowded streets. The entrance they're proposing here at Brook Cove, we just deliberately talked about the rock wall through there, the historic rock wall through there. That entrance through Brook Cove dead ends to that rock wall. So the rock wall is on both ends. So you're still looking at tearing out the rock wall that we've all talked about here. And I think there's no reason, from your maps that you have up here, coming off 2168, it shows what, two entrances there, is that correct? Is that even off 2168? Or are they showing only the entrance through Brook Cove?

Only through Brook Cove.

See, I mean, you're going through a residential, a dead-end subdivision that has 16, 18 houses in it, and you're wanting to add all that traffic flow through those houses on one entrance. When you could easily come in off 33, I mean, right past the gas station. There's other ways to look at coming into that property other than tearing down that fence and going through a private neighborhood. You know, I pull a boat. I can't even turn around in that street. I have to back in because it's so narrow. And you know, if somebody parks on the street, because the street, there is no room for the volume of traffic for an entrance through Brook Cove Drive. Absolutely not. And I just want to thank you for your all's time. And like you said in your prayer earlier, That little dead-end street is what made things unique about Danville that drew me here, and it made it unique about the location where we decided to live. But thank you all.

Thank you, sir. All right, next up is Chase Broach, and then Bruce Jones.

Good morning. My name is Chase Broach. I live at 115 Brook Cove currently. However, I'm an interesting anomaly, I guess. This is my second home on Brook Cove as my parents lived there beforehand. So at 117 Brook Cove is where my mother still resides. I've been in this neighborhood since the early 90s, moved out of my parents' house in 2006 after graduating college, and then I had the opportunity to return in 22. I bought the house next door to my widowed mother. I knew how amazing it was to grow up on a dead-end street and how unique it was, and to have this now, same opportunity for my child, I cherish even more. I do not want to see Brook Cove become a through street. Dead ends allow for safer bike, pedestrian travel. Once it's connected to a subdivision, it's going to invite more criminal activity, facilitating easy travel for the would-be criminals. It's also going to crowd our roads and increase hit and runs for vehicles that are parked on the roadway and other properties. Obviously, the apartments and stuff, they're going to decrease our property value. It's going to increase an already traffic flow. Sorry. It is going to increase... traffic flow on an already crowded highway. Being a highway means we have to work with the state for the non-existent shelters. We're gonna have to add turn lanes. We know the challenges that working with the state faces. We've already talked about all that today in the other two meetings or other things that have gone on. I'm not sure the need for any type of retail space as Brook Cove Center already has empty buildings there. There are spaces available. Lastly, I'll just say that between the last presentation, this one, the construction that's going on at Asuka, the apartments, all the residents that are coming in, all this sounds great. It's not your all's responsibility, but I implore you to work with the city, work with the county. We have got to facilitate more police officers, more firefighters. We're already understaffed at the police department. There's no way that we're gonna be able to continue to handle this type of growth. Thank you for your time and I just wish you all good luck in the difficult decisions ahead of you.

Thank you, sir. All right, Bruce Jones and then Brittany Broach.

My name is Bruce Jones. I live at 507 Stony Brook. Been a resident there for 29 years. My property backs up to the back side of this property at the cul-de-sac on the far left of the map. I'm at the back of the cul-de-sac with the pie-shaped property. So if you look at that, from that tree line that divides the yellow and orange there, that tree line, there's a steady and significant slope from that tree line back to that property line to my back. Anytime we have sustained rain or heavy rain, I get a significant stream that flows behind my property right at that property line. I mean, it's pretty significant. And part of that actually branches off and runs between my house and our neighbor's house. And the city knows this is a problem. They've come out and they've put a grate out in the middle of the cul-de-sac to help with the drainage. But that's on the other side of the street. So now we're gonna add more to the other side of the street. So it's just gonna flood through my backyard. And I'm really concerned about that and I don't see any indication on this plan for water retention. I know this is a basic plan right now. And you can see that grayish area on the left of the map where the cul-de-sac is. That grayish area indicates the flood zone. And all of this water that comes off of this concrete and asphalt that's gonna go in here is gonna flow down that hill right into that area that I've been talking about. And it flows right into Spears Creek. And we already know how much problems we have with Spears Creek. The city just came out recently and replaced a bridge on Twinbrook and made it wider because of the water problem. So there's not been a lot done inside the subdivision. to deter the water issue. So that is a major concern for anybody that lives along that back property line. My other concern is obviously traffic has been stated before. And one thing that hasn't been mentioned, and I'm pretty sure I remember this correctly, I believe this commission had approved a property development just south of Streamland recently, is that correct? By Shepherd, I believe. At the base of the hill and the turn. So we're already looking at a new development coming there of a subdivision. Now we're talking about another one with DCA and the city is routing truck traffic through 2168. There's a new sign up there on 3rd Street right beside the hub, Frankl. I've been here a long time. Can't get it out of my head. Beside the hub coffee shop that says trucks use 2168. That's Third Street which leads to Shaker Town Road. So we're gonna have semis coming through there on a two lane road, no shoulders, no turning lanes. Let's add two property developments to it and a school, that's great. It doesn't make sense. It really doesn't make sense.

Time. That's really all I have.

I thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir. All right, Brittany Broach and then Landon Messer.

Hello, I'm Brittany Broach. I live at 115 Brook Cove. I'm here to express my strong concerns about the proposal to turn our dead end street into a through street connected to the new development. First, our street was never designed to handle that level of traffic. Right now, it is a quiet residential dead end street where families live, children play outside, and neighbors know each other. Turning it into a cut through road would dramatically change the character and safety of our neighborhood. One of the biggest concerns is traffic safety. The entrance and exit to our street is already difficult and not ideal for heavier traffic flow. Adding dozens of additional vehicles would create congestion and increase the likelihood of accidents. Many of us have small children who ride bikes, walk, and play outside. Increased traffic would make it much more dangerous. Another major concern is the destruction of the historic wall that has stood for over 100 years. That wall is part of the history. Once it is torn down, it can never truly be replaced. Preserving historic features should matter to this committee and to our community. We are also concerned about the long-term impact on crime and overall neighborhood security. Increased density and traffic can place a strain on neighborhoods that are not built to support it. Residents chose this area because it is quiet, safe, and low traffic. This proposal changes that entirely. I want to be clear, this is not about opposing growth or development altogether. We understand communities grow and change, but development must be responsible and compatible with existing neighborhoods. Forcing a dead-end residential street to become a major access road is not responsible planning. I respectfully ask the committee to reconsider this proposal and explore alternatives that do not require opening our street to through traffic, destroying historic structures, or compromising the safety of the families who already live there. Please listen to the residents who call this neighborhood home. We are asking you to protect the safety, history, and character of our community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, ma'am. All right, Sam Poncel and then Jenny Holland.

Yes, my name is Sam Poncel. 49 years ago, we moved to Danville to raise my family. We bought a house in Streamland that backs up to the fence.

When we bought that house- Can you tell us your address, please?

336 Streamland Drive.

Thank you.

When we bought that house 49 years ago, we were told by the realtors that Steel Gregory owned that farm. It would always be agriculture. It would never be a subdivision. And about four or five years ago, somebody bought that subdivision and came to planning and zoning, try to change it. And the way I heard it from Steel Gregory, there was like a handshake that he sold the land, but it wasn't gonna be developed. It was gonna stay agricultural, which apparently it's not, people getting greedy. I live right on the fence line. When it rains, behind my house, it's like a river roaring. because the water flows down into the gully. There's a bridge on Streamland Drive. Sometimes I can't go to town because I can't get over the water on the bridge. There's times I can't get home because 33 is flooded. And now we're gonna put subdivision in to give us more water. And I don't know if you travel 33 to get out of Danville. But like everybody is saying, it's a two-lane road. There's no berm. There's three dips in that road that are hazardous. People coming out of Brook Cove gas station almost hit you all the time. Brook Cove, it sits back in there. When you're coming down the hill, you hardly can see Brook Cove's turn in for those people, and now you're going to put a major highway through there to a subdivision. I don't know what's wrong with people, that they're greedy or whatever, but they want to change the lives of hundreds of people that are satisfied living in Streamland.

Thank you, sir. All right, Jeanette Holland and then Sam Beshears.

Hello, Jeanette Holland, 111 Brook Cove. While it does appear the future land use map does support the zone change, the goals and objectives do not, particularly speaking to the connection to Brook Cove. Goal 1A, to protect existing neighborhoods, would connect residents to business directly. They must have ingress and egress on 33, as should the new subdivision. Goal 4B says to promote safety and connectivity. While you're making more connectivity, it is not safe. Brook Cove is a hidden entrance. Have you guys driven? Okay. You come over a hill, across from us, I sent you all photos, 55 miles an hour. Add trucks being routed this direction. When my daughter started driving, I told her, turn right, you will get killed. Because often I come to turn left, it's already angled 45. You have to turn 135 degrees with cars coming 55 miles over a hill to turn north. It is not safe at all. So it would be unsafe to use the cul-de-sac as a entrance. Goal five, A, E, and F are violated because we must preserve the historic fence, Do not build near a floodplain. If you extend Brook Cove, not only would it destroy the fence, it would create more impermeable surface and it already floods there. So leave that as a open green area. Thank you for listening. Do not connect to Brook Cove. Look at alternatives. We're not against all development, but there's a smart way to do it. This would be, a very, very unsafe way to enter it. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Sam Brashears and then Scott Kleckner.

My name's Sam Brashears, 109 Brook Cove Drive. I've lived there 35 years and I don't want to see the road opened up there and all that traffic. I got a grandson, he's a two-year-old, that likes to play out in the street, run across the street and all that. And I just don't want to see it. Take out that historic wall, the roads are too narrow. You have to stop when two vehicles come into the driveway there. And it just really, a lot of these people, you just need to listen to them. They need to fix the highway on 33 from the Brook Cove store down to the roundabout. They got a four lane. Them put openings there on to the I'm for zone change but if you do it right but you open up our little neighborhood there it's going to affect everybody. So and it's not going to be any good. It's going to be unsafe for the kids and I don't I think you don't want to be responsible for some kid getting killed. So that's what I've got to say because most of these people have covered everything I've had just thought about and I just hope you take this serious. Thank you, sir.

All right. Scott Kleckner and then Harvey and Claudia, are you all for the next agenda item? Yes.

Good almost afternoon. My name is Scott Kleckner. I reside at 451 Coldstream Drive. If you look at the map the bottom left corner you can see a white spot on the roof. I'm at the corner basically of that property. On that property there appears to be an underground stream or cave that during sustained or heavy rains bubbles up from underground in my backyard. When we get when it's very heavy the water shoots out about that high and the stream about that thick. That yellow section right there where the residential's planned, like my neighbor from Streamland Drive and Stony Brook said, that is a slope from the northeast corner to the southwest corner, which ends up basically right behind me. All that drains into Streamland. Could you put up the floodplain map, please?

I believe this is it. This shows the floodplain.

I'll keep going. It has a gray area all around. You can't miss it. There you go. So you see that gray area? That is the path, somewhat of the path of Spears Creek. I've been, and my family has been in that house for 50 years, more than 50. The city fixed the bridge at one point, it was a single culvert, now it's wide open, and we still get overflow across the road. If we put nonpermeable surfaces and we still have more drainage coming that way, what is gonna happen in this floodplain? Sorry. FEMA establishes the baseline, has established the baseline National Flood Insurance Program standards, and a study is required, When an adjacent property is adjoining to the floodplain, it's a hydrologic and hydrologic and what's that? Hydraulic and hydrologic. Have you guys done that study yet? Okay, so that is requirement by FEMA before any development is done. Sorry. they have to prove that any development will not raise the flood levels for the 100-year floodplain. That is a FEMA requirement. Sorry, got my notes spread out here a little bit. When our property, when my grandparents, estate was being prepared for sale, there was a 50-foot retaining wall just to the left of my property that had to be torn down before it could be sold because it impeded water drainage. If that 50-foot retaining wall was an impediment to drainage, what is an entire community going to do? Because of this and the fact that over 35 homes or properties are immediately downstream of this naturally occurring process, while simultaneously included within the bounds of the FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain zone, The Naval Planning and Zoning Commission should allow delay in granting any approvals of the development while the legal appropriate hydraulic and hydrologic studies are completed that prove, as required by law, the proposed development will cause no rise in flood heights. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you, sir. Chester Cavanaugh? Nope. John Ibavez? Nope. OK. That is all for the sign-up sheets. All right.

Anyone else wish to speak? Come forward, please.

My name's Bailey Smith. I'm at 119 Brook Cove. I'm here today to formally express my opposition to the proposed zoning change for the 46.692 acres located off Highway 33, Checkertown Roads near Ridgeview Road. While I understand that growth and development are a part of our community's future, I have serious concerns about how this proposal would directly impact Brook Cove Drive and the surrounding neighborhood. What drew my husband and I to purchase our home on Brook Cove five years ago was the quiet cul-de-sac neighborhood. The limited traffic, privacy, and peaceful atmosphere are major factors in what makes this area desirable for residents. Brook Cove Drive was never intended to serve as a through road or main access point for a larger development. I strongly oppose any plan that would use Brook Cove Drive as an entrance or access point for this project, as it would completely change the character, safety, and traffic flow of our neighborhood. I'm also concerned about the increase in traffic, congestion, noise, and strain on local infrastructure that could result from this development. Brook Cove was not designed to handle the volume of traffic associated with a larger residential or mixed-use development, and the impact would negatively affect the quality of life for the families who currently reside here. Additionally, I'm concerned about the proposed RM2 neighborhood business and general business zoning classifications and the impact those uses could have on our neighborhood. I strongly oppose any high density housing complex style developments, apartment style housing, or commercial expansion that would alter the quiet residential character of Brook Cove. If development is ultimately approved, I respectfully request that it be limited to appropriately planned single family homes that are consistent with the surrounding area and community character. While change is inevitable, I respectfully ask that the board carefully consider the concerns of the residents who currently live in this area and to reconsider any proposal that would connect this development through Brook Cove Drive. Thank you.

CHRISTIE WOODARD- Thank you, ma'am. Do we have anyone else who wishes to speak? Yes, ma'am.

My name is Samantha Kleckner, and I live at 451 Coldstream. That's my husband. Same home. With respect and appreciation for the fact that they are not considering putting walking trails directly to the back of our properties, I do find objection with the fact that it was stated that the community was – and that community input was given because I've spoken to over 100 residents of both Brook Cove and Streamland subdivision and not one person was contacted for input on this. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Okay, I know that the commission has some questions and so let's go ahead and have some discussion. My question, I'll just start it off. My question is, can you please share, are there any plans for any access to this besides that which comes from Streamline? Is there any that will come off of Shaker Town Road?

Yes, ma'am. Looking at the drawing behind you, our primary access is directly to Highway 33, Shaker Town Road. That is in the northeast corner of our parent tract adjacent to the GB zone proposed area. That is the primary entry for the entire development. I appreciate the neighborhood concerns with connectivity to Brook Cove. The reason, the primary reason that we have that is that the comp plan and the city want to promote connectivity between neighborhoods. In fact, there is a map of proposed secondary street corridors within the comprehensive plan It shows green street proposed street lines on it, which almost precisely mimics our proposed street layout. Brook Cove, the right-of-way of Brook Cove terminates at the north property line of the Brook Cove development and it joins us. So we show that connecting to Brook Cove in an effort to try to comply with the city's proposed, the city and the county and the planning and zoning comprehensive plans, goals, and objectives. I spoke with the applicant during this conversation. He is completely fine if you want to condition the zone change upon not having connectivity to Brook Cove. He is not opposed to that. He would be fine with you mandating that we do not connect to Brook Cove. we show it simply because every publicly available document not just written goals and objectives but also a depicted map show that proposed connector street but that would be a secondary entry to the development at best our primary entrance is located there in the northeast corner and that was chosen because it has the best attributes for an entrance location. I've spoken with KYTC preliminarily. We meet site distance requirements at that location. There will be a study to determine appropriate turn lanes and what's warranted, but that's a next step. This requires significant investment by the developer. The first step is to see if we can get a recommendation for a zone change. If we get that, then we're moving on to the next phase, which is the more robust design. Many of these concerns will be addressed with a full blown civil design. The flooding concerns, I appreciate those as well. Frankly, Streamland is a good example of a large neighborhood that's built with zero concern for stormwater mitigation. It's probably why you have stormwater regulations now in the city. We will be held to these regulations while Streamland was not because it was developed prior to the advent of your regulations. We can't solve all of Streamland's problems because Spears Creek runs right through it. You all had an exhibit up there that showed the lot layout of Streamland. I'd say that there's 60 lots that are entirely in the floodplain. We can't fix that. But we will do things that will likely mitigate some of the problems, especially for more minor storms. A 100-year event is what is depicted on the floodplain map. And so that blue area is what FEMA thinks roughly will be flooded in a 100-year storm event that has a 1% chance of happening in any year. You could have it two years in a row. It's a 1% chance. we're gonna comply with all the stormwater regs, but we haven't fleshed out a full plan yet because it wouldn't be, I wouldn't be doing right by my client to say, let's go ahead and do full construction plans before we come here for the first step. uh we identified in one of our exhibits proposed stormwater detention areas that one so those red hatched areas there's one in the south west corner there's one that basically encompasses the floodplain adjacent to spears creek along shakertown road and then there's another one in the north central area of the property and Those areas would all be where we would most likely have stormwater detention ponds that would retain, like was discussed in the previous agenda item, When we're done, we're not putting any more water on anyone else than what's there today. We have to do that, because that's the Churall's rules. They're already in place to protect the public. But in doing that, I can see how some of these houses on the west side of our property that are on the east I can see how they would have some runoff during a storm. There's water that sheet flows across this farm now and ends up in their backyard. We're proposing streets that are gonna have curb and gutter and storm sewer. And so a lot of that water that they're seeing now will be intercepted before it enters their backyards and it will be conveyed to a stormwater detention pond. So that will only help their situation. I can't promise that they're never gonna get flooded. there's always a bigger storm, but we will design to meet your standards, which will, in effect, help mitigate this existing issue that, like I say, is likely the reason you have the regs you have today. I think those were the two major concerns were traffic and the traffic impact and the flooding, and I think that we will address those in spades. And I think it's really up to you all whether you decide you want connectivity to, if you wanna uphold your map that you produce with secondary streets and the goals and objectives, we have the opportunity to connect to Brook Cove. We do not, we cannot connect directly to Streamland because there are no street stubs that touch us. We have the opportunity. It's up to you all to decide. Do you want to uphold what's in your comprehensive plan and what you previously indicated you want for a secondary street network, or do you want to mandate that we do not connect? And we are fine with either conclusion you all arrive at. If you want to mandate that we do not connect to Brook Cove, we're totally fine with that.

Thank you, sir. Other questions or discussion?

Are we closing the public?

No, this is in the open.

Director, you had a note in your staff items of concern that you had a bullet there for flooding concerns. Is that adequate, what he's talking about?

Yes, yes. What he said is correct. And that was our discussion with the city as well.

And that's why we asked for this watershed map to... By the way, you did a great job explaining the different regs that we have today on that topic. So thank you very much.

Let the commission, just a moment, let the commission bring forward questions first.

And I think the applicant was hoping for a chance at rebuttal. I think Mr. Stevens covered some of that. I don't know if Mr. Manning also wanted to.

I believe there's still some public comment that may occur, so I'll wait for after that. I just didn't know if any questions were going to be directed my way.

Any questions from the commissioners or discussion? I believe there was a couple of other concerns.

Just one comment, and I was looking at the detention pond.

Come up to the speaker. I'm sure everyone can hear about, no problem. There's a, right where the detention point is, I don't know, I know you surveyed back there. There is a stone wall along that fence line as well. Just wanted to point that out.

Thank you, sir. I believe there is another in the, come forward, ma'am. State your name and address.

Glenda Obermeyer, 113 Brook Cove. And I had a couple of concerns here. Not everyone on Brook Cove was notified. There were two people that was there, as far as I know, and all the people in Streamland weren't notified as well. We do currently have walking paths along 2168. I've never seen anyone on them, so I don't see the reason for any more. And the other one is they keep saying affordable housing, okay? What are the starting prices to these homes? And how big are the lots going to be? So that's just my concerns. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am.

I believe you wanted to do a rebuttal.

Yes, just very quickly. Once again, we're talking land uses and all of the concerns brought up are specifically items addressed. when drafting the comp plan and the future land use map, whether that's the commercial or potential for commercial development along Shaker Town Road, emergency services and its funding, safety, et cetera. All of these are elements that are gone through at length when putting together the comp plan and the future land use map. As has already been explained at length, the development can't make any of the stormwater worse. We can't solve the prior approvals of any development 50 or so years ago whenever Streamland was originally development. As to connecting to Brook Cove, again, this is all at the direction of the comp plan. It specifically has an exhibit, it's actually exhibit B in my justifications, showing the proposed collector streets which come off Brook Cove and almost identically match our development here. But once again, we still have the main entrance to come off Shaker Town. In regards to traffic, we're providing three stub roads north that could all eventually connect to 2168. Again, that's why you have the comp plan, the future land use map. The eventual goal is further connectivity. Growth enables and funds emergency services. Inherently, stuff like this that raises property values, allows further development, increases property taxes, income taxes, etc., That only benefits the county and the city. And so just as a whole, these are all items that have been addressed in the comp plan and the future land use map. They are gone over repeatedly, repeatedly. A lot of those are public hearings. Public is allowed to come, have their input on the future land use map, on provisions of the comp plan, et cetera. And the result of that, years and years of work, is this future land use map which we match. So that's all I wanted to say.

Thank you, sir.

Justin, did you have copies of those justifications? Were those distributed?

I sent them in.

I'm not familiar enough with that question to answer it.

But I think he does state correctly that the comp plan does emphasize connectivity. It does. Yes, that's how.

But you have to jump the fence, though, to get the connectivity there.

It doesn't. To your direct question, no, it does not state that. Right.

But to jump it, that's his own shot.

is a little bit different situation because it's it's not connecting to an entire subdivision it's a it's a single short road there's no if you were creating a larger community kind of connecting streamland or something with this that would make more sense but to connect to a road with 20 houses on it

All right, any further discussion by the commissioners?

Was the question answered about the property values, the amounts of homes claimed?

No, ma'am.

I'm not an appraiser. I cannot speak to property values or a realtor. So once again, that would depend on further sub-development.

That's right.

Has the... I guess site plan been developed enough to know how many how many residential lots you're talking about and the size of those lots and the maybe approximate square footage of some of the homes.

I don't know any final numbers. I would also say that how the process, as you're aware, works is also with further stormwater analysis, all of that. That dictates a lot of that. I mean, I've seen developments elsewhere that start out with an X number of lots, and then after you do your stormwater analysis, et cetera, you have to take some off because you have to put in more detention or you have to put in further gutters, et cetera. Right.

And you'll be back to this.

committee again to be able to do that. We'll see it again. Correct. And the public would have comments. Further subdivisions are still subject to approvals. Obviously, they have to meet ordinances. Any variance, conditional use, anything like that is back before you all or the board.

And in combination yourself, the staff items listed as concern are contingency of completion anywhere for a lot of this rezoning situation. And one of them is a traffic study. Correct. So we're going to, it'll happen. And your projections, you've got to go through that. That is an effort that works. And I believe in the. It's important to know that we're good to this point.

Correct. And I believe in the proposed motion that was one of the contingencies listed on Hannah's. I prepared my own findings and proposal, but I think a larger mirror. That I do not know. As far as what would fit within the ordinances, I don't think it would be 100. But no, I don't know a final number. I don't know if you have more info.

So for the staff items of concern, the perimeter walking path is dropping off?

Yes, I mean, it was mostly just a conversation that we had with the city during tech review. And I also do want to talk about that Stub Street connection because in the comp plan, we do talk about connectivity a lot. It is in most of our goals and objectives. And when we had this conversation with the city, that was always planned in Streamland. That's why that Stub Street was on Brook Cove. Exactly. So it was planned.

It'll be discussed at a different level than here.

Yes, yeah. When Streamland was developed, that plan was in place to stub all the streets to the north to eventually connect to that north bypass. Exactly why there are stubbed streets to the north too in this new development. Future development.

That's the problem. You say it then. How long ago was it?

Future development whenever that may come.

Other discussion? OK, I am ready for a motion then.

I think the motion should include the staff items of concern, but not the perimeter walking path.

OK.

This would also include not connecting through group code.

If that's the motion.

You can do it either way.

I do want to state that we discussed in Tech Review that preservation of the rock wall. And I believe by either federal or state standards, they have to preserve that rock wall. I was going to say, that goes without. And so we talked about that being removed through Brookhove, and that was to be expected.

Yeah, I think that historical preservation, but then also Brookhove, it may have been stubbed out to connect to future development, but the road is an advocate for connecting to future development. narrow small street and the entrance to and from it.

When I've discussed this with the city, yeah, when I've discussed this with the city, that road is adequate for connectivity.

Yeah.

In tech review, you all decided to remove the wall that was there.

No, no, no. In tech review, we discussed that that rock wall in connecting to Brook Cove would have to be removed, but the rest of the rock wall by either federal or state standards has to be preserved. We expect that that rock wall will be removed from the connectivity to Brook Cove, but we are okay with that because they will preserve as much rock wall as possible.

I just want to be careful about the wall discussion. Our intent is to preserve as much of the rock wall as is humanly possible. It's a varying condition, but we've even drawn zoning boundary lines on rock walls so that they can be easily preserved, so that they won't conflict with any development. They won't be in the middle of a lot. I'm not going to say there won't be one stone left unturned out there, but that is our goal is to preserve it. But I want to be clear, it would be news to me if there is a state or federal law that mandates that you cannot touch a rock wall. So I don't want to be making it seem as though we're making a promise that if we go out there and... there's 50 foot of rock wall in question right now if we connect to brook cove you'll have to tear out at least 50 feet of rock wall because there's going to be a 50 foot wide right of way but i just want to make that crystal clear that that you know i don't there there is no law that uh regarding rock walls but we are going out of our way to protect them because we support protecting them thank you sir

All right. Let me propose. So I'd like to make the motion to approve the zoning map amendment, finding that it is consistent with the future land use map and consistent with the comp plan and our goals and objectives. I would make that motion contingent on completing the traffic study that's currently being conducted by KTC. and submission of the drainage plan to deal with the property drainage.

I do think the vegetation buffer is a reasonable, that's already in our standards.

Yes, and I'm willing to add that too.

Okay. All right, I have a motion. Do I have a second?

In the motion, would we include not through traffic through Brook Cove?

He did not.

I did not. And that's, I think, a conversation point amongst us. The comp plan specifically talks about connectivity. And we spent a lot of time in our development of the comp plan to talk about how we don't want isolated neighborhoods. We want to be able to connect neighborhoods. If we choose, as a group, to say we want this one to be isolated, I'm OK with that. But it's not consistent with what we talked about in the comp plan.

And I think also, if I may, in the complaint, we talked about emergency vehicles, school buses, proper ingress and egress of exits. So I think that's also the discussion we had in tech review of connectivity and why it's important.

All right. I have a motion. Do I have a second?

Yeah, I'll second the motion so we can have a discussion.

Thank you. Let's have discussion.

Commissioner Nolet, you mentioned a drainage plan. Did you envision that being at the site plan or subdivision plat phase or something that we would have earlier than that in the process?

I think it's acceptable to be at the subdivision plat phase. Okay. Is that right, Hannah? Yes. Yes.

Okay. Discussion?

I don't think we ever envisioned tearing down a rock wall to connect to ten houses. I still think we envisioned that.

I think that needs to be part of the motion. If it's not, I mean, do you think we approve? I think we need to exclude.