Planning Committee - Regular Meeting

properties in Louisville working at Mid-City Market. Thank you very much for spending time and talking with us about this project. And it's again, it's going to be the end of 2026. You can expect to see some demolition being started and the beginning to mid of 2028. We'll actually have a finished product.

So I really appreciate the opportunity to talk about the project and welcome the opportunity to engage with the community on this basis. Thank you so much for the for the time.

Thank you again, Jesse Shannon, who is the president of branch properties, who is developing mid city market. Thank you very much.

External agency fund grants are a critical initiative by Louisville Metro government to support local organizations that deliver essential services and programs across our community. By providing financial resources to nonprofit agencies, the external agency fund grants help foster a safer, stronger, more vibrant and equitable Louisville. Here's a look at one of the organizations utilizing external agency fund grant money to better our community.

great work here.

The Book Works has been around since 2009. We moved into direct service back in 2022. When you recognize that need for one-on-one education advocates, we're helping out even in small ways for a lot of people.

Each of us have our own individual caseload that we kind of work with. And so once we get in connection with them, kind of just get the chance to get to know them, find out what barriers they're facing and see how we can help

So that could be chronic absences, suspensions from school, problems with transportation, or anything related to the foster care, juvenile justice systems. We work with a lot of young people who are really excited about school, that they want to learn, they want to be in school, but they don't have the proper supports in place in order to access those services and to be successful in school. We began to notice a need for daytime spaces for young people who are 12 to 21 who are out of school on school days.

We have a general idea of who's coming to the sites on which days and who may not be there, so it's never like a surprise or anything, and it's just cool sending whoever's suspended. It's just people who are already on our caseload.

Here at Americana, Neighborhood House is one of our other sites, 201. These organizations all came together and did some collaborative funding in order to create this project.

Primarily, we have online learners in here, so those who are doing homeschool or just an online learning program, or students who may be suspended throughout the day and just need an extra resource to come in and sit down and get caught up on their work before they go back so that they're not behind.

The EIF funding has been really, really pivotal. A lot of the funding really, really directly affected our learners. Without it, we really would not have the stability that we're able to have financially in order to focus on our programming. I started the book works two years ago. I was one of four, and we now have a team of 10. A lot of the folks that we work with are facing some very, very serious situations, housing instability, food insecurity. As one organization, we can't have a superpower in every single area. So that's why we really rely on our partners to be able to kind of create that comprehensive support. One of the other amazing parts of EAF funding is just the collaboration that it increases between organizations.

We're helping out even in small ways for a lot of people.

going from getting suspended really often to being in a place that really nurtures them, that helps them feel like they are in a place that really cares about who they are.

It's just very important to show up and be supportive of what they're going through and understand them as human beings and not look at them for the ways that they've been labeled negatively or anything like that. Just recognizing that they deserve respect and they deserve to have access to education and community support and mental health resources. So I definitely just enjoy being a good role model and being supportive of who they are and the needs that they have.

The External Agency Fund Grant Program operates through a competitive grant process, ensuring that public funds are allocated responsibly to organizations that demonstrate the ability to make a meaningful impact. Through these grants, Louisville Metro government seeks to strengthen partnerships with community organizations and invest in programs that promote stability, growth, and opportunity, making our community a better place.

Don't open it yet. Close it yet.

I'm making her love me on her whole Microsoft account.

We've been waiting for you.

Hmm.

Metro TV, 30 seconds. Good afternoon and welcome to the Regularly Scheduled Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting. I am Scott Reed, the Vice Chair of the Committee. Today is Tuesday, June the 2nd. And joining me in the chambers, we have Councilwoman Parrish-Wrights, we have Councilwoman Raymond, we have Councilman Hudson, we have Councilwoman Rui, we have Councilwoman Jennifer Chappell, and online we have Chair Owen. Just a little bit of housekeeping. We have item number five, which is being held at the request of the sponsor. And with that in mind, we have, starting off ordinance, pending legislation, ordinance 0-127-26, an ordinance relating to the zoning of property located at 3827 Poplar Level Road, containing approximately 8.22 acres and being in Louisville Metro. Case number 26, zone 0025, do I have a motion? Motion to second it, Julia. Oh, I'm sorry, disclaimer.

This meeting's being held pursuant to KRS 61.826 and council rule 5A, read in full.

Thank you, Cheryl. Now to you, Julia.

Julia Williams, Office of Planning. So this is 26 zone 0025. This is located at 3827 Poplar Level Road in Council District 10. The existing use is single family. The proposed use is multifamily. The existing zoning is R5 in the Neighborhood Forum District. The proposed zoning is R6 in the Neighborhood Forum District. The request is for a change in zoning from R5 residential to R6 residential. There was a waiver and a detailed district development plan with binding elements associated with the site. The site's approximately .22 acres. It's an existing single family structure to be converted to a duplex with a detached third dwelling unit in the rear. There's no new construction or expansion of the existing structures. This is the applicant's development plan showing the existing home in the front and then the existing accessory dwelling unit in the rear. This is what the subject property looks like along Poplar Level Road. The rear of the property along Jackson Avenue. These are the existing dwellings across the front along Poplar Level Road. This is facing northwest toward Poplar Level Road and Trevelyan Way, and then facing southeast towards Poplar Level Road and Grenade Avenue. The applicant held their neighborhood meeting on February 25th, 2026. The Planning Commission held their public hearing on April 23rd, 2026, where there was a motion to recommend approval of the change in zoning, passing by a vote of seven to one. Are there any questions?

Whose council district is this? Oh, I'm sorry. Would you like to speak to it, Councilman Raymond?

Please. Well, first I wanted to ask if you understood why there was a no vote.

That commissioner did not speak as to why they voted no.

Yes, I'll speak to it if I may. So this is a property, it's a five bedroom house that was previously rented out and there's not the market that there used to be for renting five bedroom houses. And so the owner of this property is converting it with only internal renovations. so that each floor is rented, so it's essentially a duplex. I went to the neighborhood meeting. There was no objection. Actually, at the neighborhood meeting was the couple who are the current tenants who are supportive of this change, so I was actually really disappointed by this one no vote because it's delayed the progress. We talk about how things move really slowly. This is a very simple change that enhances the neighborhood and is desired by the residents, and it has still taken months and months, so I ask for your support.

Thank you. Councilman Owen.

Thanks, Vice Chair Reid. Quick question. So my understanding is that this will go from a single family with a CUP for an ADU, and now it will just be a multifamily. And so the ADU will go away, and there will be three units of multifamily rental. Is that a correct understanding?

I don't believe this site had a CUP for an accessory dwelling unit.

So it was being rented not as a short-term rental, but as a long-term rental previously? The back unit?

I know the young man who lives in the back. It's the owner's son.

And so do we know, again, I'm for this. I was just trying to get some clarification.

So the current tenants who now occupy the entire house will now occupy one floor. The young man who lives in the ADU in the back will stay there. And then a new tenant will move on to the second floor.

Great. And I just wanted to mention that, you know, when we do break up a five-bedroom house, for example, we do into two units, we have created smaller units that will be more affordable to people. And I think that is a net positive here. So just wanted to highlight that. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Chair Ohan. Any other comments? We have been joined by Councilman Batchon. Stewart, Councilman Benson, were you in the queue? No, I was here too. Oh, I thought I'd acknowledge you. Councilman Benson is in the chambers as well. With that, I think we're ready to vote.

Chair Owen?

Yes.

Thank you. Voting's closing. Vice Chair Reid, you have eight yes votes.

Thank you very much. This passes, and we'll go to new business at the next council meeting. Next is item number 0-137-26, an ordinance relating to the area-wide zoning of property located at 1901 R. Payne Street, containing approximately 3.09 acres, and being in Louisville Metro, case number 26, zone 0030. Do I have a motion? Motion is seconded. Chair Owen would like to speak to this, I'm sure.

Thank you, Vice Chair Reid. This is a long time coming. I'm excited about this. So a couple of things I want to highlight again here. We've talked about this previously, but I wanted to say that this I don't expect to be precedent. I do not think that we as Metro government should proactively go after Properties that are historically that are grandfathered in as industrial zoning and pull the industrial zoning designation out from under companies who are operating in in those locations. I think that is bad practice, bad business. And I do not think that this should set that president precedent. So I wanted to say that. 1st, and foremost, um. In the case of this property, the property has had multiple explosions over the years. At least two of those explosions were deadly. And frankly, the most recent explosion, it's a small miracle that it didn't take more lives than it actually did when you saw the huge chunks of metal that went flying throughout the Clifton neighborhood. And so, once that happened, the mayor came forward and I was in full agreement that this should never operate as heavy industrial again. And we requested that the planning commission take a look at what this might look like to down zone it. The recommendation was to change from M2, which is a heavy industrial zoning designation. to see him, which does allow for some light industrial zone, but also allows for some housing, multifamily housing and some other things. So it adds more flexibility to what the property can be used for going forward, which I think is a good thing and does will make it easier for the company to sell going forward because there'll be more users that could potentially use the property as opposed to only a heavy industrial user using the property. I wanted to acknowledge that Commissioner Lanert voted against this at the Planning Commission. He was the sole no vote at the Planning Commission. And I do respect Commissioner Lanert's expertise as it relates to industrial properties. He has brokered industrial properties in Louisville for the past four decades. Um, and he suggested that we were. Uh, reducing the value of the property by, by, by lowering the zoning, lower the intensity of zoning from into industrial to see him, uh, again, acknowledging his expertise. I do have to disagree in this particular case. Um, I think that we have at, I think we've, like, I said, previously, we've added some value to the property in the sense that we have added the number of different uses that can be used. Um, that can be taken advantage of at this site going forward, which I think does add some value. Um, we have allowed some light industrial to continue here, which, you know, could. could obviously turn into future cash flow at this site going forward. So at the very most, I don't think we have reduced the value of this property in making this zoning change. One other thing, and then I'll Step back here, um, the planning commission, sorry, the planning staff at Metro government, uh, under the leadership of Brian Davis has reached out to, um. On a handful of occasions, uh, since this. Process has been in place. um what what i had requested from the company is that they come out and explicitly say that they they were not against the change in the zoning They did not agree to say that explicitly. But at the same time, we have given them multiple opportunities on four or five different occasions to come out and say, please don't do this. You are really taking away the value of the property by doing this. And they have not done that either. And I think that their silence on that there's something to be said for the fact that they did not take the four or five opportunities to state their opposition to this. And so I think that's important. So with all of that said, I really ask for your support and hopefully we can, this change in zoning will bring closure to the neighborhood in a way that I think will be incredibly healing. So I ask for your support and hope to move it forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair. Does anybody have any questions?

Councilman Batchelon. Thank you, Vice Chair Reed, and thank you, Chair Owen, for your explanation. And just for the record, I've stated these issues before, but I want to state them again. And I think we're opening up a can of worms, ladies and gentlemen. I think we should allow the market to play its role and do what it needs to do and not rezone a property outside of the scope of Allowing the owner to go through that zoning process like they should This is going to increase the value of the property. I can agree with you on that councilman Owen and Create a new market value for this property to be sold or redeveloped. I Strongly believe that we should not be doing this for the purpose of that owner needs to go through this process like everybody else does I

Thank you, Councilman Batchon. Any other questions? Would you like to respond, Councilman Owen? Okay. Any questions? That said, I think we're ready to vote.

Voting's open. Chair Owen?

Yes.

Thank you. Voting's closing. Vice Chair Reed, you have five yes votes and three noes.

Thank you, with that it will go to new business, I'm sorry, old business in the next council meeting. Next is item number three, an ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on rezoning conditional, this is item number 0-135-26, an ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on rezoning conditional use permits and plan certain category 2B and three development plan applications relating to telecommunication hotels and data centers pending a review and recommended changes by the Planning Commission. Do you have a motion?

Motion.

Motion is seconded. I think we have Councilwoman Chappell that would like to speak to this.

Sure thing. I used to be on planning and zoning, and our meetings were much longer. Preface, no AI has been used to write this plea, and all the words are my own, as is all of my words I've said in this chamber thus far. Colleagues, we have kicked this can far enough down the road. On January 23rd, the Planning Commission was supposed to release the recommendations for the changes to the Land Development Code regarding data centers. 130 days have passed since that deadline, and we are without recommendations still. What's even more puzzling to me is that recommendations were published online on January 2nd, and they were taken down just hours later. It seemed like the work was completed, so where did it go? And to be clear, these are recommendations that we're waiting on. It's not legislation in its final form. They aren't automatic updates to our land development code. They're recommendations that have the opportunity to be molded, which will be subject to public comment and will be under review by this legislative body. There's a lot of work ahead of us, but we can't move forward without the foundation of these documents. Data centers are a hot button issue worldwide, and there's certainly one that folks care about here. Since they're in their infancy, we don't understand a lot of the implications of a data center. How big of a population does one data center serve? How many data centers does Louisville need to power its population? What communities outside of Louisville benefit from data centers located here? Do those communities have buy-in Louisville has more water than we could ever need or use is something I've heard before, but how much has to be used in order for that precious finite source to be tapped and threatened? Solar panel energy advances as quickly as televisions do and computers are no longer the size as buildings. Look how tiny this one is here. Does technology in a data center advance as quickly? And are the monstrosities that we're building now appropriate in five, 10 years? I don't know the answers to these questions, and I have a slew of others that are going around in my head. And I doubt that anybody else in this room has answers to these questions, but I'm sure that you have a whole lot more. I know that I am not willing to let Louisville be a guinea pig for these data centers. It's convenient to rally against a moratorium when it's not your backyard being threatened. And let's be clear, I live in a very dense urban area and I doubt that a data center would ever be coming to my backyard. However, that doesn't mean that I can't prevent myself from fighting for someone that might have one in their backyard. Beyond that, we all pay a monthly LG&E bill and a bill to Louisville Water. We're all subjected to the same price hikes, including the one that MSD is proposing right now. So if you don't care about the deforestation of data centers, their light pollution, their noise pollution, the creation of a brown field, et cetera, then maybe you will care when your water turns brown and your electricity bills rival your mortgage payment. Maybe these are all fears, but they're not ones that I want to test. Now let me address some concerns about the moratorium that my colleagues have brought up. First, there are no data centers in the pipeline, so this legislation would be moot. God forbid that Louisville Metro government takes a proactive approach to something instead of laying in the weeds and being reactive to something. Why are we too afraid to put our residents over private predatory development? Besides, if plans for a new data center were to be submitted tomorrow, any action by Metro Council would take little too late. Let me remind you, we're about to go on break for about three weeks. It might be too late. A moratorium will signal that Louisville is closed for business. How could we insinuate that Louisville is closed for business when one Louisville distributed these talking points before Derby? Over two million packages move through UPS every day, and we just passed Memphis as the largest air cargo hub in North America. Louisville saw over $3 billion in new capital investment last year, an amount that's on par with Austin, Nashville, and Raleigh. Ford is reinventing the assembly line in Louisville and how cars are put together. GE is building a new 800 job, half a billion dollar factory that will manufacture washer and dryer units across an area the size of 33 football fields. Slate Auto, a new Jeff Bezos-backed startup, is building an affordable EV, and their global customization hub is right here in Louisville. Taiwan-based Foxconn is investing $173 million into a new facility that for the first time since the 1980s manufactured consumer electronics at scale in America. And downtown has over $2.5 billion in development underway that includes a 1,000 room convention hotel in Humana's old HQ and a new JW Marriott hotel. And our airport is in the middle of a billion dollar modernization, improving the experience and the number of flights. I've also heard the administration has promised these recommendations in June and they're actively working on tightening them up for distribution. These recommendations are coming to us from the planning department via the planning commission. The administration will have the same opportunity to offer their feedback as does Metro Council and the public when we get these distributed. Besides, why should we trust that we're getting these recommendations when we were told we were getting them in January and then in May and now in June? And I also hear from my colleagues, I never support moratoriums. A moratorium on moratoriums is a weird flex, but okay. I'm sure that there's other more nefarious reasons that would prevent a council person from voting in support of this moratorium. Since there are only assumptions, I'm not going to address them, although I can assure you that your voters want this moratorium, and I promise you that there is no price worth the sale of your dignity. I'm wrapping up, so, cue, know you're coming. But I'd love to read an email from my friend, David Kaplan, who, or sorry, David Kalin, who had emailed all of the members of the Planning and Zoning Committee this morning. And I just wanna read this email, it's fairly short. My friend Jennifer Chapel asked me to reach out to seek your yes vote on a moratorium for data centers today. These centers really intrigued me as I own a parcel where one could be built. If I were to build one, I would wait until best management practices are adopted regarding them. As my friend Stuart Benson will tell you, a machinist or a builder One needs a blueprint or a diagram to get the project done correctly. This is what a moratorium would provide and I'm puzzled at how the Office of Planning started on this then it suddenly disappeared. But the Office of Planning has made this common practice They have studied the Floyd's Fork watershed for decades without a plan being adopted. Not only a major issue of our tax dollars, but it's worth showing the rest of the nation that we're not a smart growth city building without future generations in mind. So let's pass this, these are my own words now, it's the end of his email, but I just want to encourage my colleagues to vote yes on this so we can pass this moratorium, get the recommendations, have the tough conversations that we need to have, and update the LDC responsibly so we don't sell out any more of our communities. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman Chappell. What is the length of the moratorium? How long are we, or is there a length?

180 days, which would be six months.

Okay. Councilwoman Parrish-Wright.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think Councilwoman Chappell gave a great explanation of all of this. I've thought about what I would say because I have pre-typed message that I wanted to use, but I just want to say this makes sense. It gives us an opportunity to be proactive. This is what our constituents are asking for. It is in the backyard of my district, even though the one being built is in District 1, you can throw a rock over into District 3. I went to some neighborhood meetings and I heard the concerns from people who are living in those communities who just found out about it, who are still trying to understand it. I then drove and walked the property. with a constituent and it was huge. And we, and I know that life thrives around water. I know that we have a good source of water, but we need to be able to make decisions that mean something to our community. Louisville has never been closed for business. There's not a time I've seen Louisville closed for business. So I think that if, that is a concern that doesn't make sense to me. I think the email from that Jennifer read is so important. This person is saying they have a parcel that could be considered for that, but they would not build without having these regulations in place. And I think that with us going on vacation, with all the things that are going on and how this first one got in because of it was already zoned and it's already ahead of the, the laws we have, the moratorium makes sense. That's all we're asking. Let's do something to show the community we're listening. Let's do something proactive. Let's work together. This is not negative. This is not against business. This is not us trying to shut down every developer. This is saying to the community that we hear you, we heard you, and we're taking action. Thank you.

Councilwoman Raymond.

Yes, is it appropriate to ask the planning team questions about the rollout of the recommendations? May I ask the planning team questions about that? Could you all explain better to us and to people who've been watching but haven't quite been able to grasp it, like me, what has been the timeline for the recommendations, why the delay, and when can we expect them and what will they look like?

Sure. So Brian Davis, Office of Planning. In terms of when you can expect something, we are in the process of finalizing a draft, and we hope to release it next week. So this has been an interesting and challenging task for us to complete for a number of reasons, and Councilwoman address several of them, just because there isn't a whole lot of information out there. A lot of communities are all kind of in the same spot in that you have this use that is a somewhat fairly new use, especially when you think about the hyperscale data centers. And people are treating it all kinds of different ways depending on how the regulations are. We reached out to some of the peer cities that we speak with and they were treating data centers anywhere from like an office, like any other office use to some sort of heavy industrial use. And so people are all over the place in terms of how they're dealing with those. And it's been a topic where really every week there's new information out there about what goes on at the data centers, how they're operating, why they're operating the way they do, and how communities are dealing with them. So it's something that we've been watching and kind of following. You know, another challenge that we were kind of dealing with while we were in the process of, you know, doing all this research was the state legislation in the session that we just concluded in April. There were five different bills that were proposed that were called and act relating to data centers. And so, you know, kind of the thought was like, you know, before we put anything out there, before we do anything with this draft, let's watch and see what the state's gonna mandate because we didn't wanna produce a product that was gonna be, you know, essentially null and void because of an action that the state was going to be taking. Now, none of those wound up passing, but, you know, they were out there, and if you've watched the legislature in the last couple years, you know, you have to wait until the last two days of the session for anything, because that's when everything gets done. So we were watching that. So as I stated, though, we are in the process of finalizing the draft. It'll be in a form that is, well, it'll look like a strikethrough of the current LDC because that's how we write the proposed amendments when we do it. You know, basically it's saying, okay, this is gonna be added, this is gonna be subtracted. And so we will be releasing that document again hopefully next week. And then once we do release that, there will be a 30-day public comment period in which we take feedback on that and then we take the public feedback into consideration before we consider moving it for a public hearing before the Planning Commission.

Thank you. A quick follow-up. It can't be a coincidence that we're hearing this moratorium ordinance and the recommendations are coming next week, right? Did this force your all's hand?

Again, we've been working on this, you know, as you all know, for a while. And so, I mean, we just for various reasons and obviously I would not, you know, the moratorium probably did help to accelerate things. But I think in terms of having a product where we're addressing some of the concerns that were brought to us by the community whenever we were doing our round of public engagement and getting the feedback and getting all the information that we've been gathering, it's taken a while to put this together. It's not been an easy thing. Okay, thank you.

Just one question for Brian before we get to Councilman Chappell. Many of our constituents, many of my constituents are asking the question, How did they get this last one in under the wire? What happened? So there's a classification in the Land Development Code that talks about data hotels. Would you explain that a little bit, please? Sure.

So under the current regulations, there's a use in there called telecommunication hotels, which it's kind of an antiquated term now, given where we're at, but it is a type of data center. And so based on the information that we have that's available out there, then the interpretation was made that data centers fall under that particular type of use. I know that category is similar to that. And so that is why the project that was previously proposed on Campground Road, it was allowed to progress through the system underneath that interpretation.

How many, if you had to guess, how many small data centers do we have in the city?

Depending on what you read, they say there's as many as three dozen or so of the smaller data centers. And I think that they operate in all different parts of the community. They look like normal office buildings or normal warehouse buildings. You don't really know what they are out there right now. The big change in the use has been just the expansion of this into these hyperscale data centers that you're seeing developed in other communities right now. And so that's what has really got the attention of people is that these larger facilities that are taking up massive pieces of land that may use a lot of power and water and things like that for their operations. So that's what has gotten people's attention And so that is kind of like why you all created the request for us to research this and kind of re-explore that so that we can kind of move away from that interpretation that we had before and better classify this new use that's out there. Okay, thank you. Councilman Chappell.

I want to make clear that I don't have any ill will towards our planning department, and I think that you all have done a lot of work thus far, and I just feel like your hands have been tied behind your back. You didn't tie your own hands, right? But there were public meetings that were held, and you all got information, and I'm looking forward to what you all put out. I think it will be thoughtful. But it leads me to my question. This five page document that was published and then taken down, Who wrote it? Where did the mistake happen? Was this, you know, in other cities? And we drafted our own, but it went to an intern and they accidentally published it on our website? Or like, how did this happen?

No, we created, that's kind of like a first draft, a first run at what, you know, we, some of the things that we were working on based on the comments that we had received. And we were planning on having a working meeting with our, with the planning committee that to kind of go through that and get some of their feedback so that we could then go back. The agenda was published, then we got word that we weren't gonna be having the meeting anymore, so we took the agenda down. Because we lost, we weren't gonna have a quorum at the meeting whenever we were conducting that.

When was your next meeting?

I don't know when their next meeting was. After it was taken down, then we had spoke with Councilman Winkler and he's like, if you all need additional time to research this, feel free to do that. And so we never got to a point where we wanted to have another working meeting with the planning committee to talk about this.

Is Marcus your boss?

No, but he was the sponsor. Anytime there's a sponsor for some legislation that is proposed to us, then we will reach out to them and give them updates on what's going on with that. He knew that we had been doing a lot of research and that there was still a lot of things coming in, and so we had reached out to him just to see what his opinion was on the matter.

Sure, sure. Um, yeah. And I just want to say, I understand that there were things that were happening at the state level regarding data centers and that would naturally, um, naturally give you pause. But I also want to say to my colleagues that wouldn't have had an impact on whether or not we passed a moratorium. So if anything, I'd love to apologize to the public that we have not addressed this sooner.

Councilman Hudson.

Thank you, Chair. Given the testimony from staff, I'd like to move to table, please.

There is a motion on the floor. I'm sorry? Oh, second. I'm sorry. There's a motion on the floor to table. This is a voice vote, correct? All those in favor say aye.

Can I, can we, can, I would like a roll call vote, please. Skirt.

Skirt. Vice Chair Reid.

Chair Owen.

Councilman Hudson, before you make that proposal, can I ask a follow-up question of Brian Davis? I think it's an important clarification before we make any motion going forward. Is that something you're willing to allow me to do? I think the motion's already been made and seconded.

I'll have to defer to the clerk. I will withdraw my motion.

Thank you. Vice Chair Reed, can I ask Brian a question here? Absolutely. Thank you. Brian, so I think one of the, I think it's important to understand, so what would the process be if somebody wanted to reach out to Metro government right now and say we want to create a hyperscale data center or a data center of significant size, And we're still kind of in this kind of cat and mouse game of do we need to pass a moratorium proactively or can we effectively do an administrative moratorium to make sure that we do not have any more of these come down the pipeline before we're ready for it? Can we talk about that a little bit? Because my preference Right now, we have effectively done an administrative moratorium. We do not have any more of these proposed in front of us. And so since January, we have effectively enacted an effective administrative moratorium. So can you talk to us a little bit about what that process looks like and whether we run the risk of allowing another one of these to go through the pipeline without being more proactive about it?

Yes, I'm reading the language of the moratorium right now to see how it's worded. Yeah, so as worded in the moratorium, if that were passed, any applications would be frozen as is unless they have a public hearing scheduled. Administratively, I think you're correct. I think there's a lot of hesitation for anyone to come and submit an application for any kind of changes related to that, Middletown did pass a moratorium, so if someone were to come in and ask something about a property there, we would obviously say, well, Middletown's passed a moratorium, we're not accepting the application. I mean...

This actual moratorium sitting in committee, we table it and it's sitting in committee, Could we then pass the moratorium like we had talked about previously when Councilman Winkler had brought this to our committee previously? And that's what our plan was, to let it sit in committee. And if somebody actually filed an application, we thought that we could then, at the next committee meeting, planning and zoning committee meeting, we could then pass the moratorium to halt any future development going forward? Would that be an effective approach here, or are we running the risk that somebody would get in under the wire?

I mean, I think someone could, if they were to submit an application, there is no way that we would schedule a public hearing prior to any other meetings of the Planning and Zoning Committee here. So I think if this item were tabled today and then someone submitted a pre-app tomorrow, they're not going to have an opportunity to get to a public hearing prior to you all being able to take action in two weeks on this item. So I don't think we run the risk of you know, something coming in and getting in under the wire in terms of scheduling a public hearing as is worded in the proposed moratorium.

Okay. I think that's important because, I mean, I do not want another data center to move quicker than we're able to respond. And I'm not stupid. I understand that politically the right thing to do here is to be proactive and pass a moratorium. But just because it's politically the right thing to do doesn't mean to me that we've been effective at administratively stopping these. And I think we can continue to be effective at administratively stopping this. And while it may not mean anything to some people, to me, a moratorium should be the absolute last resort. And we have another option here. And that is to basically have this sit in committee and use it if we need it and to me that's another option that we can use and a better option than actually the last resort which is what is proposed here so i will not because i want another data center to move quicker than we're able to i am 100 confident that using this strategy we will able to keep any data centers from moving forward, I will be supporting tabling this so we can leave it in our back pockets and use it when we need it because, again, I believe a moratorium, government's passing moratoriums should be used as an absolute last resort. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair. I think I'd like to get a legal interpretation here. Legally, can we stop something? If someone were to apply and make an application for a data center and we've got this moratorium tabled, can we as a body then take a vote at the next or an upcoming planning and zoning committee meeting and effectively impose the moratorium in time to stop it?

Travis Feaster, Assistant County Attorney here. So very broadly, this is sort of a vested rights conversation. It's part of the reason why we draft the moratoriums to deal with items that have been scheduled for a public hearing already can move forward. Somewhere along the process, you do have a sort of write your application being heard and going through the process. The question is sort of where that occurs. There's not a hard and fast case or statute in Kentucky to determine where that is. But based on the case law, we think it's approximately at that sort of public hearing phase where all the agencies have commented, they've gotten all the proper stamps and approvals. The only thing left is for Metro government to hear it. And at that point, Metro government says, actually, no, we're not going to, that's potentially an issue. So if it is earlier in that process, you know, pre-application or an application but still in agency reviews, those sorts of things, that's where we felt comfortable. Again, we don't have a hard and fast case to point to, but it sounds like if we could catch a case in that process, that would be acceptable. On the other hand, if a case got scheduled before council took action, then we would start having some tough conversations.

Okay, thank you. Councilman Parrish-Wright. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Chair, point of order. Councilman Hudson. Councilman Hudson.

Sorry about that. So I guess I need to ask the clerk for clarification here. I withdrew my motion for... You have to get back in queue.

I'm going to allow Councilman Hudson to make his motion to table.

Move to table, please.

Second. I have a motion and a second. I think the request was for a voice vote. I'm sorry, roll call vote.

Chair Owen?

Yes.

Voting's closing. Vice Chair Reid, you have five yes votes and three no.

Thank you. It has been tabled. So we'll move on to the next item, which is item number 40-138-26. an ordinance relating to the detailed district development plan for properties located at 9718 Dixie Highway and 5308 Citation Road containing approximately 2.7 acres and being in Louisville Metro case number 25DDP0085. Do I have a motion? Motion.

Second.

Motion is seconded. Julia.

Julia Williams, Office of Planning. This is 25DDP0085 for Chick-fil-A. This is located at 9718 Dixie Highway in Council District 14. The existing use is institutional with a proposed use of commercial. The property is zone C2. The request was for a revised detailed district development plan with binding elements. The property is zone C2 in the neighborhood form district. They're proposing a restaurant and they're also proposing Fiesta Way to be extended to connect to Citation Road. This is the applicant's development plan where you can see Fiesta Way connecting to Citation and then the location of the restaurant. So this is the subject property view from Dixie Highway. adjacent property, the residential located along Citation Road, residential view from Fiesta Way, residential view from Vela Vista, commercial view across Dixie Highway, So the Planning Commission held their public hearing on April 2nd, 2026, where there was a motion to recommend approval of the development plan passing by a vote of eight to zero. Are there any questions?

Councilman Bachchan.

Thank you, Councilman Reed. I don't really have any questions. I would like to just make a few comments, I guess, on behalf of District 14 in support of this development. The restaurant that is coming in is a well-established brand. that the community has written letters of support rather than letters of opposition. I think 31 was the number to be exact. I look forward to our colleagues supporting this development on Dixie Highway as it continues to grow and the momentum is moving forward in the right direction.

Thank you. What was the commission vote on this?

Eight to zero.

Travis, is this another one of the situations? Would this actually come to us for a vote since it passed unanimously?

This is Laura Ferguson, Assistant County Attorney. This is a development plan that had the council review binding element, if I remember correctly. Got it.

I understand. Cool. Councilwoman Marie.

Thank you, I read comments that came in, people very much in support of the Chick-fil-A, but they were concerned about the exit, removing the dead end on Fiesta Way. Is that still part of the plan?

Yes, there's a connection through Fiesta Way to Citation, so it won't be a dead end anymore. It will go through to Citation.

Do we have any idea how much traffic that's going to generate on that road?

I don't believe a traffic study was required for this development. Oh, it was. Yes.

Yeah, there was a traffic study, but I could see nothing in it with any estimates of what's going to happen to Fiesta.

I'm not able to answer that question.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions from the committee? Seeing none, this requires a roll call vote.

Chair Owen.

Yes.

Voting's closing. Vice Chair Reed, you have eight yes votes.

Thank you, and this will go to business at the next council meeting. I am not seeing anything else on our agenda. Does anyone on the committee have any questions or anything they'd like to discuss? Seeing none, we are adjourned. Thank you.