[0:08] We'll call the meeting to order. I'll start by reading the open statement.

[0:13] This is the special public hearing of the special public hearing of the Louisville Metro Planning Commission

[0:17] to hear case number 26 LDC 0001,

[0:21] proposed land development code amendments related to neighborhood housing,

[0:26] as advertised and docketed for hearing today.

[0:28] Public notice has been provided and materials have been

[0:31] available for review by the public.

[0:34] The following rules are in place for today's hearing.

[0:36] Please silence all cell phones.

[0:39] Please be courteous and respectful to the commission

[0:41] and your fellow citizens.

[0:43] Any disruption from the audience can result in removal

[0:46] from the meeting by the chair.

[0:48] Today's proceedings are being recorded.

[0:51] Anyone wishing to address the commission must do so

[0:54] from the podium.

[0:55] If you plan on speaking, please fill out a

[0:58] speakers form as soon as possible.

[1:01] Priority shall be given to the speaker cards

[1:04] in the order that they are received.

[1:06] Only those who have completed the speaker's

[1:09] form will be allowed to speak.

[1:10] Any person wishing to speak on the proposed land development code amendment

[1:14] shall have a total of no more than four minutes per person.

[1:18] Speakers are not allowed to see their time to other speakers.

[1:22] We ask that you please give your name and zip code of your

[1:25] residence prior to making your comments.

[1:28] The commission may ask questions of a speaker

[1:30] at any time.

[1:32] In order to focus on testimony, the commission and staff

[1:35] will not respond to any questions from speakers

[1:38] during this public hearing.

[1:40] If you have any questions, please contact a staff member

[1:43] after the conclusion of the public hearing.

[1:46] Today's hearings will proceed as following.

[1:49] Staff will present a summary of the request.

[1:52] Any person wishing to speak on the proposed land development code amendment

[1:55] shall have a total of no more than four minutes per person.

[1:59] Pursuant to KRS chapter 61 and the commission's bylaws,

[2:02] the commission's deliberations and voting today will be held

[2:05] immediately following the public hearing for each case.

[2:08] No party will be allowed to speak during the deliberations

[2:11] of this commission.

[2:12] Roll call, please.

[2:15] Leonard?

[2:16] Present.

[2:17] Lohan?

[2:18] Here.

[2:20] Born?

[2:21] Here.

[2:22] Cheek?

[2:23] Here.

[2:25] Sidnor?

[2:26] Here.

[2:28] Steph?

[2:28] Here.

[2:29] Mims?

[2:30] Here.

[2:31] Fisher?

[2:32] Here.

[2:33] Citron?

[2:34] Here.

[2:35] I'm asked the staff to please stand so I can swear you in.

[2:39] Raise your right hand, do you swear firm that the

[2:41] testimony that you're going to give to this commission is the truth?

[2:43] Yes.

[2:44] All right, thank you.

[2:45] Once again, we're here for 26 LDC 0001, which is a

[2:48] land development code text amendment regarding neighborhood housing.

[2:53] Our case manager is Joel Doc, I'll turn it over to you, Joe.

[3:01] Yeah, good evening.

[3:02] Uh, Joe Doc, Louisville Metro's office of planning, it's a pleasure to be before you

[3:06] all tonight, uh, to present this regulation that's been many years, um, in the works.

[3:12] Um, so this is 26 LDC one for neighborhood housing.

[3:21] So this is a text amendment that's guided, uh, like all land use decisions

[3:25] by the comprehensive plan.

[3:27] Uh, specifically those goals, objectives, and policies and the chase principles,

[3:31] uh, known as, uh, that are connected, healthy, authentic, sustainable, and equitable.

[3:37] It's also being driven by a council resolution adopted in, uh, 2020,

[3:41] uh, that set into motion a comprehensive review of the land development code.

[3:46] And requested the planning commission to bring forward recommendations

[3:50] for more equitable and inclusive development.

[3:54] Uh, the changes presented in this staff report, um, build upon many years

[3:59] of outreach and engagement with the community, uh,

[4:03] respond to the feedback that we've received during this outreach and engagement,

[4:08] and incorporate best practices in planning research and data.

[4:13] Uh, the changes also represent a continuation of amendments that have already

[4:16] been adopted, um, in the spirit of Resolution

[4:19] 82 series 2020 and the comprehensive plan.

[4:25] Notably, accessory dwelling units or ADUs.

[4:29] Uh, changes to our child care regulations to increase access.

[4:33] Uh, changes to manufactured or factory built housing to again, increase access

[4:36] to different housing options across our community.

[4:40] And, uh, allowances for urban agriculture on, uh, vacant

[4:43] spaces throughout the community.

[4:48] The changes, um, proposed tonight emphasize increasing

[4:52] housing choice to fit more people's needs.

[4:56] Individuals looking to age in place, retirees, new

[4:59] home buyers, uh, folks that.

[5:02] find themselves in transition,

[5:04] employers, employees.

[5:06] Um, it is really designed to

[5:09] uh bring about choices and allow

[5:11] for flexibility in our land use

[5:13] regulation uh to meet everybody

[5:15] where they are.

[5:17] It prioritizes areas with existing

[5:19] infrastructure like complete street and pedestrian network,

[5:23] uh transit services, sewers and drainage systems.

[5:27] Um, and the regulations also

[5:29] strive to create understandable and streamlined procedures.

[5:32] Um, specifically along commercial

[5:34] corridors and within the urban core.

[5:38] There are three main categories of

[5:40] changes being proposed uh tonight.

[5:42] Uh neighborhood housing building types,

[5:45] housing and mixed use corridor

[5:47] improvements, and the new urban

[5:49] center neighborhood form district.

[5:53] So, to begin, neighborhood housing

[5:55] is used to describe a range of

[5:57] housing choices that fall between

[6:00] your typical single family detached

[6:02] home, one home on one lot, and

[6:04] the larger apartment complexes.

[6:06] Um, all of which respect the size

[6:08] and design of existing neighborhoods.

[6:11] These are duplexes and triplexes,

[6:13] cottage courts, and town homes,

[6:16] all intended to be no larger,

[6:18] no wider, no deeper, um, than

[6:21] existing single family homes found throughout the many neighborhoods in

[6:28] So, where will neighborhood housing be allowed? In traditional form

[6:32] Um, think really the old city limits.

[6:35] Um, as well as town centers,

[6:38] village center form districts that

[6:40] find them themselves in kind of

[6:42] older developed commercial areas throughout the county.

[6:46] Um, also in areas within a

[6:48] quarter mile of the suburban

[6:49] marketplace corridor, regional center

[6:52] or town center. So think those

[6:54] commercial districts uh that radiate

[6:56] from the urban core, Shelbyville

[6:58] Road, Taylorsville Road, Bardstown,

[7:00] Dixie, uh to provide for more

[7:02] housing choices that can support

[7:04] uh businesses and the amenities

[7:06] that you find in those areas.

[7:08] As well as as a component of

[7:10] new development within proposed major

[7:12] preliminary subdivisions.

[7:14] So neighborhood housing being allowed

[7:16] when a new development goes in

[7:18] to be built alongside uh single

[7:19] family housing.

[7:23] Uh this map shows those areas

[7:25] that I just described, uh so

[7:28] you can see uh the uh uh

[7:31] large area of blue that is

[7:33] the traditional uh neighborhood or

[7:35] traditional form districts.

[7:36] Uh the yellow represents those

[7:38] suburban marketplace corridors and

[7:41] other form districts that neighborhood

[7:43] housing can provide support to, uh

[7:45] that is represented by uh the

[7:47] hatched areas.

[7:53] So, neighborhood housing must meet

[7:56] specific development standards in

[7:58] order to be approved.

[7:59] If it does not, it is not approved.

[8:02] These standards are um what we

[8:04] consider are permitted use with

[8:06] special standards, our chapter

[8:08] four part three regulations.

[8:10] They're going to require that all

[8:12] neighborhood housing be located on

[8:13] a public street, require that

[8:15] the height, width and depth

[8:16] respects adjacent single family

[8:18] homes. Uh single family home

[8:20] ownership and building diversity are

[8:22] encouraged through these regulations.

[8:24] Clustering and concentration are

[8:26] limited. So there is a 50%

[8:29] maximum for building duplexes,

[8:31] triplexes, fourplexes along a block.

[8:34] So it encourages and actually

[8:36] requires the existence of single

[8:38] family homes. Um, and then

[8:40] does not allow for three of

[8:42] any of the same type of

[8:43] neighborhood housing to exist in a row.

[8:46] Uh no blank walls facing public

[8:47] streets, no parking in front of

[8:49] buildings, a typical single family

[8:51] home, does not allow for parking

[8:53] um in front except in in

[8:54] approved driveway. Uh neighborhood

[8:56] housing is just the same, parking

[8:58] is required at the rear.

[9:00] Uh single family demolition is

[9:02] restricted. Um, emergency demolitions

[9:04] are the exception. Um, otherwise

[9:06] to demolish a single family home

[9:08] to build neighborhood housing, it

[9:10] has to come before the planning

[9:11] commission and compliance with the

[9:13] comprehensive plan must be demonstrated.

[9:15] Uh sidewalks are required. If

[9:17] sidewalks aren't present, they must be built.

[9:20] Um, again, neighborhood housing may

[9:22] be developed alongside single family

[9:24] homes, uh subject to gross density

[9:26] of the property and all other

[9:28] applicable regulations of the land

[9:29] development code. Tree canopy must

[9:31] be met, sidewalks must be built.

[9:34] Um, roads must exist, lot

[9:35] sizes uh uh must be uh maintained.

[9:40] Um, neighborhood housing built in

[9:41] compliance with these regulations and

[9:43] approved through the processes laid

[9:45] out in the proposal may not

[9:47] be used for short-term rental or

[9:49] any form of group housing, that's

[9:50] boarding, transitional or rehabilitation.

[9:53] Um, and the regulations also

[9:55] do not create automatic non-conformance

[9:57] for currently illegal dwellings.

[9:59] So, if you have three units existing in a

[10:02] legal family home. It does automatically grant you non-conformant.

[10:05] That building would have to come forward and demonstrate compliance

[10:08] with the regulations in order to uh be a legal dwelling.

[10:15] Again, just going over the neighborhood housing building types.

[10:18] Um, the full list of what's included are duplexes,

[10:21] triplexes, fourplexes, multiplexes,

[10:24] townhouses. These are attached homes,

[10:26] either on the same or separate lots.

[10:29] Cottage courts and walking courts are really unique

[10:31] forms of development

[10:33] that allow for um houses to front, either on a courtyard

[10:37] and open space,

[10:39] Um, or exist with just a sidewalk,

[10:42] and then all vehicular access is provided to the rear

[10:44] or the sides.

[10:47] Um also included our traditional mixed used buildings.

[10:49] These are in traditional forms either.

[10:52] So not in those quarter mile radiuses and not as

[10:55] incorporated into new uh subdivisions.

[10:58] A traditional mixed use building is what you find in corner

[11:00] your typical corner commercial,

[11:03] your typical historic corner commercial building,

[11:06] where you find commercial on the first floor and residential uh

[11:09] above or to the rear.

[11:13] Each neighborhood housing building type is individually regulated

[11:16] by the form district.

[11:18] So a duplex in the traditional form is regulated differently

[11:21] than a duplex um in the neighborhood form.

[11:25] We know that in traditional forms our lots are shallower and they're

[11:27] deeper,

[11:29] and in neighborhood forms uh they're they're wider

[11:31] and shallower.

[11:34] Um, so we regulate everything from uh the height based on form,

[11:38] uh the width of the building,

[11:40] the depth of the building,

[11:42] as well as setbacks, entry, orientation,

[11:45] where garages can exist.

[11:53] Um, again, this is an example, the graphic.

[11:55] It was really important as we are thinking about creating

[11:58] regulations that are understandable.

[12:01] and easy to use, not just by somebody looking to build

[12:04] a duplex, a small developer, a contractor, but also

[12:08] um the community

[12:11] to understand these regulations and what better way to do that

[12:14] than to represent these regulations graphically.

[12:17] To clearly state where the front is, where the sides are, uh

[12:22] what the building is intended to look like if you follow the

[12:24] regulations.

[12:27] Um, we again, you can see just as an example, um, the

[12:30] each individual building type, um, is is pedestrian access

[12:34] is regulated. That off-street parking is regulated to be

[12:36] at the rear.

[12:38] Um, shared parking is encouraged.

[12:41] Um, off-street parking must be provided.

[12:44] Um, tree canopy, landscaping, street trees.

[12:50] This is how it would look in full.

[12:52] So if you were looking at um, thinking about doing a triplex,

[12:56] where would you find these regulations?

[12:58] Often in the land development code you're find yourself looking in

[13:01] multiple sections of the code to sort out how you would build

[13:04] something.

[13:06] The way that the neighborhood housing regulations are set up,

[13:09] they are all in one place.

[13:10] Easy to find, accessible, so that everybody can understand them.

[13:22] The process for neighborhood housing would first be to determine

[13:25] if you're eligible.

[13:27] Are you in a traditional form?

[13:28] Are you within a quarter mile of a suburban marketplace?

[13:32] Are you doing new development?

[13:34] And then from there review additional location standards.

[13:38] Um, does the block already have more than 50% duplexes or

[13:41] triplexes?

[13:44] Um, are there already more than three or four of the same type uh

[13:47] in a in a row.

[13:49] Um, and then identify the specific standards, the setbacks,

[13:54] the number of units per building, height, width, orientation.

[13:59] Um, once you figure out out that you hire a uh an architect, um,

[14:04] you lay out the development, you do need to submit to the office

[14:07] of planning for review.

[14:09] Um, so this isn't just a building permit.

[14:12] Um, you have to submit to the office of planning so that the

[14:15] office of planning can confirm compliance.

[14:18] Again, 100% compliance gets you approval.

[14:23] There are no deviations from these standards. You either meet

[14:25] them, or you do not get to build.

[14:28] Um, if it does not, you will be denied.

[14:34] Uh, the second uh category of amendments are the housing and

[14:37] mixed use corridor improvements.

[14:40] Uh, these are to increase housing and and mixed use development

[14:43] along our commercial corridors, existing areas of activity,

[14:47] uh creating design flexibility and a simplified review process,

[14:52] um, allowing for 100% compliant uh development plans, meaning

[14:56] no waivers, no variances.

[14:59] Um, this does not include plan certain development.

[15:02] development uh development sites

[15:04] that are being rezoned or

[15:05] requesting a conditional use permit.

[15:07] Um, but developments that are already zoned correctly for the use,

[15:11] that comply 100% with uh

[15:12] the land development code

[15:14] will receive an administrative approval.

[15:17] Uh, this is rooted in the feedback

[15:19] over uh many years of research,

[15:20] the recommendations of the housing

[15:22] and mixed use development study,

[15:24] uh which was a study performed

[15:26] um in partnership with the

[15:28] office of planning

[15:29] by a design firm uh called Opticost Design

[15:32] out of uh Berkeley, California.

[15:34] It was an empirical study

[15:36] looking at um how the land

[15:37] development code restricts

[15:39] uh the market's ability to deliver housing.

[15:43] Um, in strong market areas in this community,

[15:47] uh the regulations uh prevent tens of thousands of units

[15:51] from being built that could otherwise uh be sold, rented in the market.

[16:09] Um, so some notable changes,

[16:11] um primarily to chapter five

[16:13] and how we regulate development

[16:16] uh would be switching from a measurement in feet

[16:20] to a measurement in stories only to reflect modern building trends.

[16:25] Um, we're seeing uh development that wants to have taller ceilings,

[16:30] whether that be taller ceilings on the first floor

[16:33] and uh pretty typical um um height on second and third

[16:36] or just uh 10 to 12 foot ceilings um across the board.

[16:41] The Board of zoning adjustment and the planning Commission DRC

[16:46] uh sees a number of variances for about two and a half feet.

[16:49] So that three-story building is still three stories,

[16:53] um but special permission is needed

[16:55] just to build that three-story building.

[16:58] Uh, density is being adjusted and simplified in commercial zones.

[17:02] Uh, floor area ratio.

[17:03] Uh, the land development code

[17:05] contains boxes on boxes

[17:07] on boxes of regulations,

[17:08] setback and height already set

[17:10] where you can build and how

[17:12] tall you can build.

[17:14] Um, FA FAR is a rather outdated

[17:16] uh regulation

[17:18] uh that is unnecessary within the land development code.

[17:21] It was deleted in residential

[17:23] districts in 2021 and the plan

[17:25] is to delete it in our commercial

[17:27] and non-residential districts now.

[17:29] Uh, lot size is being reduced

[17:31] to encourage home ownership

[17:32] to respond to consumer demand.

[17:34] Uh, we receive a lot of development,

[17:36] um whether that be a rezoning, uh to reduce lot sizes,

[17:39] whether that be the use of steep slope development

[17:42] transfer or other forms

[17:44] um of development, rezonings to PRD.

[17:47] Um, all to uh allow for more homes

[17:49] to be sold to new homeowners,

[17:52] people looking to afford a home,

[17:55] and the lot size just does not respond to

[17:58] uh consumer demands,

[18:00] and they do not encourage

[18:01] home ownership, so lot size is being reduced

[18:03] uh both in the neighborhood and

[18:05] traditional neighborhood form districts.

[18:07] Um, infield is being eliminated

[18:09] except in traditional uh neighborhood form districts.

[18:12] Again, these are just regulations on regulations,

[18:15] uh that make it very difficult to sort out what can go where.

[18:19] Uh, transitional standards are

[18:21] being eliminated between form districts.

[18:23] Uh, landscape buffers and setbacks still remain,

[18:26] uh but transitional standards really uh limit what can happen

[18:30] along our commercial developments, uh our commercial corridors,

[18:33] and really limit um the development potential um uh of of those lots.

[18:42] Uh, just as an example of uh what is allowed currently

[18:46] and what would require that variant.

[18:48] The same three-story building, but because one is 38 feet

[18:52] instead of 35 ft, both being three stories,

[18:55] our current regulations would not allow this.

[19:07] Um, so you can see that lot size

[19:09] is being reduced once you get

[19:10] to the R4 single family residential

[19:13] um uh zoning district. Uh, it's being reduced from 9,000 to 6,000.

[19:17] Uh, the overall gross density of the development site.

[19:21] Um, the density is not being

[19:23] increased. The lot size is going down.

[19:25] Uh, which will result in in uh more open space, more flexibility

[19:30] uh for development. It will

[19:31] result in the ability to do more lots.

[19:33] It will result in the ability

[19:35] to deliver more homes to more individuals.

[19:38] Um, but the overall density of

[19:40] development, um, is not to be exceeded.

[19:44] Changes in the multi-family

[19:46] districts, um, respond immediately

[19:48] to what the actual density is.

[19:51] So, in the multi-family districts,

[19:53] the lot sizes uh have been

[19:55] established at 6,000 square feet

[19:58] uh for decades, uh that's more than what the actual density.

[20:02] of the zoning district would allow you to have.

[20:04] And so those changes in lot size

[20:07] uh now respond and are identical to what the density is actually

[20:10] allowed to be in those multifamily districts.

[20:14] Uh this is an example of our revised threshold tables.

[20:19] Um so right now, uh the thresholds are established in uh different

[20:25] categories of whether or not they can be administratively approved

[20:29] or require uh uh planning commission or committee approval.

[20:34] Um as you all know, um a category three development plan requires

[20:39] the approval of a committee,

[20:41] a category three development plan that is in full

[20:44] compliance with the land development code

[20:46] must be approved.

[20:49] If there are no variances or waivers, there is no discretion

[20:53] to deny a category three development plan.

[20:55] What this does, these changes streamline the process to

[20:59] recognize that if a common set of rules are agreed upon

[21:03] after extensive outreach and engagement,

[21:05] that those rules should be enforced and they can be enforced

[21:09] by the office of planning and developments will no longer have

[21:13] to come before the planning commission or DRC if no variances,

[21:16] waivers, rezoning, conditional use permits are being requested.

[21:21] The third major change is to adopt a new form district called

[21:26] the Urban Center neighborhood form district that was envisioned during

[21:29] the uh plan 2040 uh process.

[21:33] The new comprehensive plan went into effect in January of 2019

[21:37] after several years of engagement with the community.

[21:40] The urban Center neighborhood form district is to join

[21:43] Louisville's Central business district.

[21:45] So it is to join uh the downtown form district.

[21:50] The urban Center neighborhood form district, um will not exist

[21:54] beyond that. Um, it serves as a transition.

[21:59] Uh right now there is no transition between downtown, um

[22:03] and our uh our lower density residential neighborhoods, so you

[22:07] drop from 30 stories to three stories pretty quickly.

[22:10] Uh the urban Center neighborhood will serve as that transition

[22:14] uh to allow for more activity.

[22:17] Um to allow for uh better pedestrian experience, um and

[22:22] more mixed use development achieving a little more height

[22:26] uh that can then step its way down as we get back

[22:29] into our uh neighborhoods.

[22:33] The urban Center neighborhood form district will introduce a new

[22:36] section of chapter 5 part two.

[22:38] The specific location of the form, so mapping the form is not being

[22:42] decided now.

[22:44] Uh first the regulations need to be decided upon.

[22:48] And then we will go through a process of more outreach and

[22:52] engagement to decide specifically where the boundaries of this new

[22:55] form district will be located.

[22:57] There are no minimum lot size depth or width requirements,

[23:01] that's pretty common for um non-residential form districts

[23:04] in uh traditional.

[23:06] Max front setback is 5 feet, so buildings uh are encouraged to be

[23:10] at the street.

[23:11] Uh to to build that pedestrian experience to encourage

[23:16] walkability, uh to encourage window shopping.

[23:19] Um minimum building height is three stories.

[23:22] Max is eight stories.

[23:24] Uh any new sidewalks need eight feet.

[23:26] Um there's an emphasis on high quality design, so windows and

[23:31] doors uh uh facing the street, animating features, uh uh um

[23:35] variation in architectural material.

[23:37] And then surface parking is prohibited.

[23:40] Um so a specific carve out to say, um we want lots to be developed.

[23:45] And we don't want them to be developed as surface parking lots.

[23:48] We want to see commercial and mixed use activity.

[23:54] So again the focus of of um of the new of all of these changes

[24:01] again is focusing on that form of the neighborhoods, focusing on

[24:04] that existing pattern of neighborhoods, respecting the

[24:07] character of those neighborhoods.

[24:10] Building types and design compatibility, rather than um

[24:14] uh regulating using outdated zoning rules uh that are much in

[24:18] need of change.

[24:20] Our current rules and our districts and the location of

[24:23] those districts limit the

[24:25] delivery of safe, affordable and quality housing.

[24:27] and exacerbate patterns of segregation.

[24:30] Uh land is limited, we recognize that.

[24:33] Um and we must sensitively and sustainably use that land, uh

[24:37] which is why these uh changes are focusing on redevelopment,

[24:41] focusing on using our existing infrastructure.

[24:45] And by updating the land development code, new opportunities

[24:48] to fit everyone's needs can be created.

[24:50] Affordability, uh challenges,

[24:53] um and housing shortages can be addressed.

[25:02] So all land use decisions must conform to the comprehensive plan

[25:05] or Plan 2040.

[25:07] Uh, Plan 2040 is driven by those Chase principles,

[25:10] connected, healthy, authentic, sustainable, and equitable,

[25:14] under which all of the goals, objectives, and policies are written.

[25:19] Uh, there are five main elements of the comprehensive plan.

[25:23] Uh, community form is the first.

[25:25] Community form, uh, goals encourage the use of form and design.

[25:29] to respond to the distinctive qualities of neighborhoods.

[25:33] Uh, it calls for the implementations of patterns of development

[25:36] to foster health and prosperity.

[25:39] It encourages innovative policies, such as this one,

[25:42] to promote resilience and respond to existing and future trends.

[25:46] This proposal very much meets all of these goals.

[25:49] It ensures that as our population changes, everyone has a place to live,

[25:53] and that place to live is safe, healthy, and affordable.

[25:56] and it respects the existing character of neighborhoods.

[26:08] Uh, Plan 2040 also has a housing element.

[26:11] The housing element of the comprehensive plan calls for choices

[26:14] and environments to support aging in place.

[26:19] an adequate supply of affordable and accessible housing,

[26:22] inclusive communities to overcome disparities,

[26:25] um, and affirmatively furthering fair and affordable housing.

[26:29] Um, this proposal very much complies

[26:31] with the housing goals of Plan 2040.

[26:35] Uh, individuals can age with dignity in a community of their choice

[26:38] by expanding housing options, um, in areas with existing infrastructure.

[26:43] Uh, it allows housing options to be made available

[26:46] for both employers and employees.

[26:49] families that desire more community cooperation

[26:51] and less individual maintenance responsibility.

[26:54] Um, or individuals and families

[26:56] that commute using alternative modes of transportation.

[27:07] We know that there is a significant unmet need for housing

[27:10] in this community, specifically for households making 30 to 50% of the

[27:16] area median income.

[27:18] And while the proposal before you

[27:20] isn't a mandate to build affordable housing,

[27:24] um, the type of housing that is being made available

[27:29] through these regulations supports affordability through its design.

[27:34] Um, it reduces the land needed to build housing.

[27:38] It increases the number of homes, uh, that you can build on less land.

[27:42] It reduces the material needed by attaching units.

[27:46] It utilizes the existing infrastructure in our community.

[27:50] Um, infrastructure construction,

[27:51] sewers, roads, sidewalks that all cost money.

[27:54] That's all passed off to the eventual consumer of that unit.

[27:58] It allows for flexibility in ownership types and styles,

[28:01] reduced lot size, attached units and cooperative methods.

[28:08] The changes, um, conform to the mobility goals of Plan 2040.

[28:13] Uh, the changes encourage walkable communities

[28:15] and multi-modal transportation.

[28:17] Um, the changes and where they are focused,

[28:20] uh, connect people, jobs, education, and services.

[28:24] They utilize the existing infrastructure

[28:26] and they promote traditionally well-connected neighborhoods

[28:29] around the urban core

[28:31] and commercial corridors that radiate from the center.

[28:35] The changes also promote the livability goals of Plan 2040.

[28:39] Uh, again by focusing on these existing areas of activity

[28:43] with streets and sidewalks, the environment can be protected.

[28:47] Uh, Plan 2040 calls for equitable access

[28:49] to land use planning and policy making decisions.

[28:53] Uh, the changes before you all tonight,

[28:56] uh, weren't just, didn't come out of nowhere.

[29:01] We've been working on these regulations for years.

[29:04] Um, I'll, I'll, I'll have a slide on the public engagement and outreach.

[29:08] Um, all of that outreach and engagement,

[29:11] all of the feedback we have received

[29:13] has been used to craft the proposed regulations before you.

[29:20] The changes also support the economic development

[29:22] goals of Plan 2040.

[29:24] They provide an economic climate that improves growth, innovation,

[29:27] investment, and opportunity for all.

[29:30] Uh, by expanding, uh, the housing choices,

[29:34] uh, for all incomes, uh, in all sectors.

[29:38] whether that be manufacturing, construction, retail,

[29:40] education, or hospitality.

[29:43] Again, it ensures that a range of options can be offered

[29:45] to connect households with businesses.

[29:49] Think housing along the corridors or in areas near businesses,

[29:52] amenities and places of employment.

[29:58] So I've mentioned this a couple times.

[30:00] Um, these regulations

[30:02] s, um,

[30:04] did not come out of thin air.

[30:06] Uh we have been doing outreach and engagement for a number of years.

[30:10] Um, the housing types that are

[30:13] the neighborhood housing building types, the duplexes and triplexes,

[30:17] uh were first introduced to the community in December of 201 21.

[30:21] Um, during an education session.

[30:24] Uh the office of planning hosted walking tours that started in 2022.

[30:29] Uh we took uh groups of individuals out into the community

[30:34] uh to see where uh middle housing has existed before zoning regulations

[30:39] took effect and outlawed these types of housing.

[30:42] where innovative methods have already been used like in the villages of

[30:45] Park de Vall, Norton Commons.

[30:47] Uh it's important to understand, to touch and feel and experience

[30:52] uh these types of of housing.

[30:55] Uh we also in 2022 began these zoning matters conversations

[30:59] with a city planner,

[31:01] which is an annual series of conversations

[31:04] um at the Louisville Free Public Library,

[31:06] which has provide a close space for planners and community members

[31:11] to have intimate conversation about things that are happening in their community.

[31:15] What is fair, what is not fair, um what regulations need to change.

[31:20] Um how to get access to participation.

[31:23] Um we hold about a dozen of those every year,

[31:26] we're in our fifth year of holding those conversations.

[31:29] Uh we just recently received a special merit award for those conversations

[31:33] from the State chapter of the American Planning Association.

[31:36] Uh these conversations are nationally recognized as a best practice.

[31:41] Uh we did Lego neighborhood building workshops

[31:43] uh that we hosted in the fall of 2022.

[31:46] So we use Lego bricks to um represent different types and styles of housing,

[31:52] um and then uh gave the community um a map of a neighborhood,

[31:57] um and had them work together to build uh communities with different types of housing.

[32:03] We hosted a professional design charette in 2023.

[32:06] We brought together um professionals from the Planning Association,

[32:10] landscape architects and Architects Institute.

[32:14] to envision how a piece of property could look

[32:18] if different housing choices were available.

[32:22] Uh we we hosted open house events following the initial draft of changes to the land development code,

[32:28] uh initially titled middle housing.

[32:31] Um we hosted those uh open house events in 2024.

[32:35] Conversations on Urban Center neighborhood form,

[32:37] um also began in 2022,

[32:39] with information, visioning and work group sessions,

[32:43] and dedicated websites and online common forms have been made available

[32:47] um for all of the changes.

[32:51] So as I mentioned a draft of the changes uh uh before you all tonight,

[32:56] uh specifically the neighborhood housing changes were initially released in 2024.

[33:02] Um uh shortly after the release of these changes,

[33:06] uh the Kentucky General Assembly passed a one-year legislative pause

[33:09] on any changes to the land development code

[33:12] that changed the uh character or density of residential areas.

[33:19] The current draft of changes was published on July 1st, 2026

[33:23] after working um since that pause on uh addressing community concerns,

[33:29] reviewing all of the outreach and engagement.

[33:33] Um after the release of this draft a total of five informational meetings were hosted in July,

[33:37] um at the Parkland, Newburg, Southwest libraries,

[33:40] Norton Commons Fire Station and a virtual a virtual session was offered.

[33:46] So all of the comments that have been received at the time of publication,

[33:49] uh were provided to you when the agenda was published.

[33:53] Um I've also put in front of you any comments that were received after publication of the agenda,

[34:00] um up until the start of the public hearing.

[34:06] Uh notice of this amendment was given in accordance with KRS.

[34:09] Gov delivery or electronic uh email delivery or electronic uh email delivery was given to all registered users

[34:14] and all Metro Council districts signed up to receive notice of development applications

[34:19] from the office of planning.

[34:21] And then a special Gov delivery was sent out to all individuals

[34:25] who participated in public outreach and engagement over the years.

[34:29] Um through the zoning matters conversations, through the walking tours,

[34:33] um and that outreach uh that we've conducted,

[34:36] uh that list has grown to over 700

[34:38] uh individual in person uh participants.

[34:42] Um we've had hundreds of uh individual conversations at the

[34:46] uh Louisville Free Public Library as well.

[34:51] So the office of planning finds that the office of planning finds that the text amendment um as has been laid out tonight

[34:57] advances the goals, objectives and policies of plan 2040.

[35:02] Um,

[35:02] and staff recommends that the planning commission

[35:05] Um,

[35:07] Uh, staff recommends that the planning commission should recommend to Metro Council.

[35:11] and the legislative bodies having authority that the text amendments be approved.

[35:16] Are there any questions?

[35:19] Questions, commissioners?

[35:23] I have

[35:24] Go ahead for

[35:25] Uh yeah, so I just have a couple, um, questions.

[35:28] So you talked about, um, surface parking prohibited. I'm assuming you're talking about surface parking lots, correct?

[35:35] Yes, without a building present, so as a primary use.

[35:37] Okay.

[35:38] Um, existing parking lots could remain, but the new construction of a parking lot would be prohibited.

[35:44] Okay. And then you talked about home prices a little bit and you showed the area median income for, um, people in the Louisville area.

[35:53] And so my question is, um, home prices go beyond the cost of construction, right?

[36:00] So we know land matters.

[36:04] When you make that statement, do you anticipate not only the cost of the of the developments, but also the styles of the development changing from the areas in which it's in?

[36:17] So you have, of course, our urban core, and you talked about branching out from the urban core.

[36:22] So, um, that versus what you may see in like J Town, branching off from Tville Road, Blank & Becker, that area.

[36:30] Do you see the styles and the cost and the cost and everything changing or is the intent to kind of have keep all of this homogeneous?

[36:37] So, um,

[36:41] It's well documented that the majority of our land is zoned for single family detached housing.

[36:46] Um, this creates an inflexible pattern of development, um, that can only deliver one product.

[36:53] Um, without going through a rezoning.

[36:56] Uh, by changing these regulations, we are allowing a greater amount of flexibility to respond to consumer demands.

[37:04] Um, the flexibility offered in these changes, um, creates a pattern of development that is consistent with single family, but allows for, um, developers

[37:18] to respond to the real consumer needs of individuals.

[37:22] Uh, so, um, if attached housing is delivered, uh, we know that through the design,

[37:29] uh, you're going to save on land, you're going to save on material,

[37:34] and then the cost that can be, uh, then the cost that can be, uh, then pushed to the consumer can be reduced.

[37:40] And then last question, um, has

[37:43] the office thought about or maybe this is already in the works, kind of having like a pre-developed kind of set of blocks

[37:52] when you have a a plot of land or some land that's X amount of acres

[37:58] already having something for a developer for a particular market.

[38:02] So like, uh pre-approved development plans.

[38:05] Mhm.

[38:06] Um, yeah, we did that with accessory dwelling units.

[38:08] So if you go on our website, uh, you can find free sets of accessory dwelling unit plan, um, that you can access.

[38:15] They are full sets of construction plans.

[38:17] that you have access to, um, that not only reduce the the overall costs by several thousand dollars of not needing to, um, hire an architect,

[38:27] but they show the community exactly what we want.

[38:31] They show the community what we want and how to do it.

[38:34] Um, places like South Bend have an excellent collection of um, uh pre-approved development plans for for middle housing building types.

[38:44] Um, it is very much, uh, front and center on our minds that it is not only just about changing the regulations,

[38:51] then going out and educating the community about those regulations and then putting tools in the hands of individuals to then carry out the changes that we've proposed.

[39:01] Thank you.

[39:03] Anyone else?

[39:04] Yes.

[39:05] Yes, ma'am.

[39:09] Will this proposed code apply to the traditional neighborhoods in the urban service district as a matter of right?

[39:20] So the, uh, traditional form districts, the traditional neighborhood form district, is primarily found within the boundaries of the old city limits, the urban services district.

[39:30] Um, they are not permitted by right as far as duplexes, whatever two units you want to do inside of a building.

[39:41] They are permitted by right with special standards.

[39:44] So if you meet all of the special standards that have been developed for neighborhood housing, then it is by right.

[39:52] There is no conditional use permit required, there is no rezoning that is required.

[39:56] Will the public have that live in the traditional

[40:02] are for

[40:03] urban service district

[40:06] neighborhoods have the right to comment

[40:08] at a planning Commission committee meeting

[40:12] a full planning Commission meeting

[40:15] or a Metro Council meeting.

[40:17] So there's very few uh uh a very

[40:20] small amount of land in the traditional neighborhoods

[40:22] that sound R4 single family residential.

[40:24] Um, but no.

[40:26] The regulations are written so that if you meet the standards,

[40:30] um, you get to get a building permit after the office of planning reviews it.

[40:35] Um, this is being offered after the many years of engagement

[40:38] and outreach that we've conducted,

[40:42] responding to feedback, looking at best practices to craft regulations

[40:46] that can allow uh a small developer or a contractor to take advantage

[40:50] of delivering housing choice.

[40:54] Well, this proposed code apply

[40:57] to the R4 single family neighborhoods

[41:00] in the formerly unincorporated Jefferson County areas that are not

[41:06] parts of small cities.

[41:08] Yes, the regulations will apply

[41:11] to areas that are within a quarter mile of the suburban marketplace

[41:15] and regional Center form district, no matter the zoning district

[41:19] in the neighborhood form, and it will

[41:21] also apply to the redevelopment

[41:23] of uh areas uh of three acres or

[41:26] more, so a major preliminary

[41:29] subdivision uh can now be delivered

[41:30] uh with neighborhood housing um

[41:32] adjacent to and incorporated

[41:34] within the single family residential.

[41:40] Let me rephrase that.

[41:41] Why does this law not apply to R4

[41:45] single family homes in the formerly

[41:48] unincorporated areas of Jefferson

[41:51] County that are not part of small cities.

[41:55] So this this regulation applies in areas where uh we can justify

[41:59] being connected to existing areas of activity uh that can promote

[42:06] walkability, can promote transit service

[42:09] and that generally are um already served by uh utilities, sewers,

[42:14] um uh electric water.

[42:18] So this proposed code does not apply

[42:22] to R4 single family neighborhoods in the formerly unincorporated

[42:26] Jefferson County, correct?

[42:30] That is not correct.

[42:31] It's not

[42:33] No.

[42:34] You are allowed to develop um a

[42:37] site of three acres or more,

[42:40] just like you can develop a site of three acres or more right now for

[42:44] single family, you could incorporate neighborhood housing

[42:47] uh within uh that development site

[42:49] in the formerly unincorporated areas within Louisville Metro's

[42:53] jurisdiction.

[42:56] Let me let's exclude three acre sites or more.

[43:00] Will this type of housing be allowed in R4 neighborhoods

[43:04] in the formerly unincorporated Jefferson County there are not part

[43:10] of small cities.

[43:14] If they meet the regulations.

[43:15] I don't know another way to answer that question.

[43:19] And if they are within one quarter mile of the

[43:22] marketplace corridor forms.

[43:25] I understand that.

[43:26] I'm talking about the R4 areas away from these corridors.

[43:32] If

[43:33] in neighborhoods

[43:34] will will someone be allowed to build a multi-family dwelling by right

[43:39] without the public having the right to comment at a committee meeting,

[43:43] a full commission meeting or the Metro Council? Yes or no?

[43:47] within the R4 single family residential zoning district

[43:50] as new development alongside single family housing, yes,

[43:54] neighborhood housing will be allowed to be built

[43:57] um, and be approved administratively by the office of planning.

[44:01] Without public input.

[44:03] Correct.

[44:05] Right.

[44:06] Thank you.

[44:07] Any other questions?

[44:09] I'd like to follow up on Commissioner Leonard's line of questioning

[44:13] and kind of uh, I got to kind of dumb it down for my purposes, but

[44:18] So if in the in the former City of Louisville

[44:21] um, traditional neighborhoods, uh, if I

[44:26] any place within that area,

[44:30] I could um apply for uh, you know,

[44:34] a range of housing options, duplexes, tries,

[44:37] fourplexes, multi-family.

[44:42] Uh, and I can go to um Brian Davis or one of the other planners here

[44:47] and provided that I meet the special standards,

[44:51] then I get a permit.

[44:52] That's correct.

[44:53] Okay. And if I uh, if I'm outside

[44:56] of the uh former City of Louisville

[45:03] boundaries and along a commercial corridor

[45:07] within a quarter of a mile of the commercial

[45:10] quarter form districts.

[45:11] Uh, I can, uh, again go to Brian Davis, one of the team members here,

[45:18] and, um, apply for a duplex, uh, triplex, fourplex, multi-family,

[45:26] uh, on our four property.

[45:29] Uh and as long as it meets the special standards, I get a permit, right?

[45:33] Yeah, if you're within the R4 single family residential zoning district

[45:36] in the neighborhood form district within a quarter mile

[45:39] of one of these uh suburban marketplace corridors

[45:42] or a site is being uh uh developed,

[45:47] um, we can approve it administratively.

[45:49] Okay, so, um,

[45:51] and again following up on Mr. Leonard's

[45:54] uh line of question because, you know, this is

[45:57] this bold new stuff.

[45:59] Um, uh, there's no uh public notification.

[46:02] In other words, you write the permits,

[46:04] I walk out the office, I

[46:05] go down and get a building permit

[46:07] and again as long as I'm meeting

[46:09] all the standards, uh, I build.

[46:10] So if you're doing a typical if you're doing a duplex that complies

[46:13] with neighborhood housing within a quarter mile, uh, the answer is no.

[46:16] You can uh submit the application to the office of planning.

[46:19] Uh, that can be approved and then you can go get a building permit.

[46:22] Um, if you're developing a site, so you're doing a major preliminary

[46:25] subdivision,

[46:27] and you are incorporating neighborhood housing uh within

[46:30] that major subdivision,

[46:31] you still must comply with the standards of a major subdivision,

[46:35] all other components of the land development code.

[46:38] The changes in the regulations to approve administratively still

[46:42] require notification.

[46:44] But they do not require a public meeting for the um a larger

[46:48] development that incorporates neighborhood housing.

[46:52] But the R4 single family neighborhood form district

[46:55] within a quarter mile duplex that 100% complies,

[47:00] once that application is submitted and reviewed by our office

[47:04] and found to be in 100% compliance and approved,

[47:07] you can go on to receive a building permit.

[47:08] Okay, so then, um,

[47:12] administrative process.

[47:14] Uh, I'm I'm talking to let's let's discuss appeals.

[47:17] What if I if it doesn't meet the special standards,

[47:21] uh, then, uh, you deny the application,

[47:26] uh, is there an appeal process to a developer,

[47:29] uh, if he wants to take it to a committee?

[47:32] Yeah, no different than any other uh administrative appeal that you

[47:36] would file today on like a category 2B application.

[47:39] That that appeal is set up to say we got it wrong.

[47:43] Um, and the regulation should be interpreted a different way.

[47:46] There are no variannces or waivers

[47:48] that are offered from these special standards.

[47:50] Okay, so then, uh, let's put it in let's put it in let's throw it in reverse for a second.

[47:54] Let's say uh I'm uh in one of these neighborhoods within 1300 feet of

[47:58] commercial corridor.

[48:00] Uh some uh person uh gets approval for the building of a multi-

[48:07] unit uh project within and and you get and you grant him the

[48:12] permission to do that.

[48:13] Can a neighbor appeal back to you and request a hearing on the matter?

[48:19] No different than how any decision by the office of planning is made

[48:22] today. You can appeal that within 30 days of that action.

[48:25] Sure. Okay, so it's all, um, so then, uh, I don't want to be

[48:29] stealing the podium here, but, uh,

[48:32] how about see home rule cities? What was it kind of the

[48:35] reaction of this Joel with, um, you know, the home the home rule

[48:39] cities that you know, both have zoning authority and, you know,

[48:43] just other

[48:43] home rule cities that are along these commercial corridors?

[48:46] Are they, are they kind of in favor of this?

[48:48] So the suburban cities uh that have zoning authority will have

[48:51] the opportunity to take this up.

[48:53] Okay. Um, you all if if you so choose are making a recommendation

[48:57] to Louisville Metro Council

[48:59] and all of those legislative bodies uh that have uh zoning authority.

[49:04] And, um, I don't know if I want to answer this,

[49:08] but how do you think

[49:10] the General Assembly, do you think they're going to come back with another

[49:13] kind of, you know, pause on things, you know, I mean what's your

[49:17] feeling in terms of does this have a traction with the state

[49:20] legislature?

[49:21] I I can't speak for the general assembly.

[49:23] I'll speak. I didn't think so.

[49:25] Yeah, Brian Davis, Office of planning.

[49:27] So, uh, you know, the uh Kentucky housing task force worked during

[49:31] the summer of 2000 uh 25

[49:34] uh between sessions and established a series of recommendations that

[49:37] they would like to see in terms of housing production across the state.

[49:41] Uh I think if you compare some of the uh some of the the the things

[49:45] that are within our uh proposed amendments,

[49:47] they are very much in in sync with some of the recommendations

[49:50] from that.

[49:51] And so I think as we come into the um 2027 General Assembly

[49:55] uh session,

[49:56] I think we we're we're going to see kind of another round of bills

[49:59] be filed.

[50:00] Uh this past year there were I think it was

[50:03] 15 different housing bills that were filed.

[50:04] Uh, and if you follow the state government,

[50:07] you know, things get filed one year,

[50:09] they kind of get people knowledgeable about the subject

[50:13] and they may gain some more traction and things like that.

[50:15] So, I think we're fully expecting another round of housing-related bills.

[50:19] Many of which are associated with the Kentucky Housing

[50:22] Task Force recommendations.

[50:24] Again, and we feel our recommendations are very much in line with that.

[50:27] Yeah, good reminder. I forgot about the

[50:28] I think it was the same as the federal bill, you know,

[50:32] Housing for the 21st Century initiatives.

[50:34] Sure. Right, yeah.

[50:36] Okay, thank you.

[50:37] And good job, Joel and the team.

[50:39] And I think we've got something here to work.

[50:43] Lennard and then you, Susan.

[50:45] May we see the map, please?

[50:53] The map shows the areas where this would apply.

[50:58] Are we correct in saying it does not apply to the

[51:02] areas in white on the map? Is that correct?

[51:06] Yeah, those cities have zoning authority and would have to

[51:08] adopt these changes.

[51:10] Excluding the single cities, incorporated cities,

[51:14] but the areas that were formally unincorporated

[51:19] Jefferson County in the white would not be governed by this

[51:22] law. Is that correct?

[51:24] The areas in white are those cities that have zoning

[51:27] authority.

[51:30] The areas in white are formally unincorporated

[51:33] areas, especially along the county line.

[51:36] there's both white and, if I may.

[51:38] If I may, yeah, so there's some slight coloration

[51:40] differences there.

[51:42] So the cities with zoning authority are masked out

[51:44] in white on the map.

[51:46] You then have a light gray, which if you zoom in close

[51:49] enough, you can see the differences between those.

[51:52] And so the white are the suburban cities that have

[51:54] zoning authority.

[51:56] The gray areas are the areas that are outside of those

[51:59] cities,

[52:01] where Metro has zoning authority.

[52:05] So with the gray areas,

[52:07] and I'll just use some examples:

[52:09] if I own a half acre in Polo Fields or Lake Forest

[52:12] or Glenmary or Woods of Saint Anthony or something

[52:14] like that,

[52:15] would I be eligible to do neighborhood housing?

[52:17] The answer is no,

[52:18] because you're not going to meet the requirements

[52:20] in terms of like the

[52:22] distance requirements from the form districts and things

[52:24] like that.

[52:28] So the areas in gray would not be subject to this

[52:31] proposal.

[52:33] They would be subject only in the sense of

[52:36] new development on sites that are of three acres or more,

[52:41] where neighborhood housing could be built alongside

[52:43] single family as a major subdivision.

[52:46] So the existing single family homes in gray

[52:51] would not be subject to this proposal. Correct.

[52:59] What is the brown with the squares around it?

[53:04] What's the question?

[53:05] What is the brown with the squares around it,

[53:08] especially Beula Church, Outer Loop, Fagan Bush?

[53:11] Is that a PDD?

[53:13] Rachel, you're going to have to help me with colors.

[53:15] I think he's indicating the yellow areas.

[53:18] So the yellow areas, I'll zoom in a little bit here.

[53:22] So the yellow areas are the suburban marketplace

[53:26] corridor form district,

[53:28] the regional center form districts, and the town

[53:30] center form districts.

[53:32] So these represent our areas of commercial

[53:34] businesses and activity.

[53:36] Okay, all right.

[53:37] And then the hatched area around is that one quarter

[53:39] mile buffer.

[53:41] So, I have a question related to that.

[53:43] I'm thinking about a piece of property we've seen

[53:46] many times

[53:47] off Dixie on Curts.

[53:53] So my question is this.

[53:54] I'm looking at mapping, that is well within,

[53:57] like it's 16th of a mile according to a measuring

[54:00] tool.

[54:03] Would all of that property?

[54:06] Does this only apply if it's a larger lot to the

[54:09] portion of the property that is So what about the

[54:12] rest of the property? So can you expand on that?

[54:15] Right, so it only applies within these hatched areas

[54:18] that are within a quarter mile.

[54:20] So if you've got 10 acres and only five is within it,

[54:24] five acres is subject to just the by-right duplex,

[54:27] triplex development standards.

[54:29] You could again redevelop a site of three acres or more

[54:32] and build neighborhood housing alongside

[54:36] single family homes.

[54:40] Right, but two sets of regulations would kind of

[54:42] apply to that.

[54:43] So if I have a piece of property and it's

[54:45] partially in,

[54:46] one set will apply to what's closest to, in this case,

[54:49] a suburban marketplace corridor,

[54:52] and the other would apply to the R4 regulations as

[54:54] drafted that would allow me

[54:56] to have attached housing in R4,

[55:01] or the small

[55:02] smaller single family lot.

[55:04] Yeah, if you meet all of the standards,

[55:05] and also all of the other standards

[55:07] of the land development code.

[55:08] So if there's uh waterway buffers,

[55:11] steep slopes, you still must comply

[55:13] with all of those standards as well.

[55:15] This appears to me, and I've read it

[55:18] and read it and read it to really

[55:19] follow what has been historically

[55:22] how things develop.

[55:23] commercial and then attached

[55:25] and smaller and multifamily,

[55:27] and as you move away,

[55:30] so thank you for answering my question.

[55:32] Well,

[55:33] [clears throat]

[55:34] I have one more followup question based

[55:37] on Commissioner Cheek's and

[55:38] Commissioner Lard's uh going back to

[55:40] the gray areas on the the map.

[55:44] You know, unincorporated

[55:46] uh areas of uh Metro.

[55:52] that sound stupid, but uh

[55:53] um, but you know, the the areas

[55:56] outside the Home Rule cities.

[55:58] If I had three acres in kind of the

[56:00] the bowels of that area, uh and I

[56:04] wanted to do, um, you know,

[56:08] neighborhood housing.

[56:09] I could do it at I could develop a

[56:11] subdivision and do it under a kind

[56:14] of a neighborhood housing regime.

[56:16] Is that correct?

[56:17] That's correct. You would have to meet

[56:19] all of the standards.

[56:20] So you would have to build single

[56:22] family housing within that because

[56:24] of the block face and the clustering

[56:25] requirements.

[56:26] Sure, but I I could also have

[56:27] density as well.

[56:28] I seemingly I've now have a density

[56:31] gain or I mean, there's no

[56:33] restriction on on density at that

[56:35] point.

[56:36] You're still subject in just like a

[56:38] major subdivision today, you're still

[56:39] subject to density.

[56:40] Um, density is switching from net

[56:42] to gross density.

[56:43] Okay. And how we calculate it.

[56:45] So, okay. So we do pick up some

[56:46] units. Good. Thank you.

[56:47] Joe.

[56:49] If a PDD has a 35 foot height

[56:52] requirement, will this change it?

[56:53] You're going to have to say that

[56:54] one a lot louder.

[56:55] I'm sorry, I don't have your

[56:57] Bob Barker mic here.

[56:59] If a PDD has a 35 foot height

[57:02] requirement in it,

[57:05] Does this change to the 38?

[57:08] If a PVD. Planned develop

[57:09] ment district.

[57:10] Okay.

[57:11] If a plan development district has

[57:14] a height requirement, uh no, the

[57:15] more restrictive applies.

[57:18] So if a PDD has a 35 foot height

[57:21] requirement and I don't believe

[57:22] that PDD is included within uh

[57:25] where neighborhood housing could

[57:26] occur either.

[57:27] So, um, uh there's a few exempted

[57:30] areas uh for neighborhood housing,

[57:32] traditional neighborhood zoning

[57:34] district is exempted, uh some more

[57:37] industrial areas if you're in

[57:39] traditional form are exempted,

[57:40] and then uh plan development

[57:42] districts um are exempted, uh but

[57:44] just like any other set of

[57:46] regulations, the more restrictive

[57:47] always applies.

[57:48] All right. And also one question

[57:51] and of course you read all this,

[57:53] but

[57:54] Does any of these changes take

[57:56] the public opinion away?

[57:59] We have engaged with the community

[58:01] for over five years on these

[58:03] regulations to craft a set

[58:05] of rules, um, that deliver housing

[58:08] choice for everybody in this

[58:10] community.

[58:11] Okay.

[58:12] All right, thank you.

[58:13] My last question for now.

[58:16] We just touched on before the meeting,

[58:18] the form district.

[58:19] There seems to be areas where roads

[58:21] have been expanded that the form

[58:23] district is not really applicable.

[58:25] Do you anticipate a revision to some

[58:28] form districts?

[58:30] Uh, that that might be appropriate,

[58:33] if you've got a four-lane major

[58:35] corridor,

[58:36] Not with this proposal.

[58:38] Not with this, but

[58:39] after this,

[58:40] But our form districts, just like

[58:42] zoning districts, our form districts

[58:44] have been driven by uh property by

[58:47] property redevelopment

[58:48] applications, zoning changes.

[58:51] Uh we have an opportunity with

[58:53] uh the land development code

[58:55] rewrite, um, that we received the

[58:58] uh pro-housing grant for a

[58:59] multi-million dollar grant from

[59:02] from HUD, uh to rethink the

[59:04] entirety of the land development

[59:05] code, which could include uh some

[59:07] changes to some form areas.

[59:09] All right, thank you.

[59:12] Any other questions, commissioners?

[59:15] Okay, we'll move to testimony.

[59:17] Thank you, Joe.

[59:18] Um, our first person, um, is

[59:20] Heather Graham.

[59:25] And once again, you'll have four

[59:27] minutes to speak and um, if you

[59:28] could give your full name and your

[59:30] zip code, then raise your

[59:31] right hand and I'll swear you

[59:33] in and you'll continue with your

[59:34] four minutes.

[59:35] My name is Heather Graham.

[59:37] I live in 40215, but today

[59:40] I'm speaking about 40217.

[59:43] Can you raise your right hand for me?

[59:44] You swear affirm that the testimony

[59:46] that you're going to give to this commission is the truth?

[59:48] Yes. All right, thank you. You have

[59:49] four minutes.

[59:50] Um, today or the reason we were

[59:53] invited here today, me and

[59:54] my husband was because we had a

[59:57] duplex in the Germantown area,

[1:00:00] Stzburg, Maryweather area and it was

[1:00:06] very positive and life altering for ourselves,

[1:00:09] as far as the decisions we were able to make,

[1:00:12] digging ourselves out of student loan debt

[1:00:16] and all kinds of things,

[1:00:18] um, and making good opportunities at an affordable price for our neighbors.

[1:00:23] The way our home was set up,

[1:00:26] we lived at 1604 South Shelby Street.

[1:00:28] It was a duplex where we lived on top, and so we occupied this space

[1:00:33] and then we rented out the lower level.

[1:00:36] Um, as a result, we were in a position where we

[1:00:41] did not have the rent very high,

[1:00:44] which put a lot of people, um, our different tenants and so forth.

[1:00:48] We, we lived with them.

[1:00:51] We had good relationships, they were able to save their money

[1:00:53] and move into permanent homes later

[1:00:56] that made a world of difference for their families.

[1:00:59] And so I was here to make a positive testimony towards that

[1:01:03] multi-living space and what it did for us,

[1:01:06] and then when we were no longer able to fit into our apartment

[1:01:09] anymore because we continued to have kids,

[1:01:12] uh, and we needed closet space and we were in Germantown.

[1:01:16] Um, we moved into the south end, and we were able to continue to

[1:01:19] maintain that unit until later

[1:01:21] we sold it to an individual who also would occupy that space because

[1:01:24] we felt like

[1:01:27] if you lived in that property and lived in the community,

[1:01:30] you would continue to make decisions that benefited it.

[1:01:33] So that was my testimony today

[1:01:36] about how being in that home really made a difference in our life

[1:01:42] and those who we rented it to, and it did not disturb that space.

[1:01:47] And as I say this out loud, another thing that was really

[1:01:50] awesome about it was because we were on that main corridor.

[1:01:52] That serves as an invisible barrier because of high traffic.

[1:01:56] So really, it contributed to a neighborhood feeling, having

[1:02:00] more than one family living in those homes that were there.

[1:02:05] Um, we were able to communicate better, we were able to have

[1:02:08] better relationships and that built up our community, which later resulted

[1:02:11] in neighborhood associations

[1:02:13] and later on, when we moved to another community,

[1:02:15] we were already accustomed to being involved,

[1:02:18] and then we got involved with those neighborhood associations

[1:02:21] and then later that grew into a farmer's market in Iroquois Park.

[1:02:26] So I know it seems far stretch,

[1:02:28] but really that made a huge

[1:02:30] difference for us that we were able to make that decision

[1:02:32] and be involved in the community that way.

[1:02:35] So that was my thoughts today.

[1:02:36] Thank you for listening.

[1:02:38] Thank you. Any questions, Heather?

[1:02:40] Yes, do you have any questions? Feel free.

[1:02:43] Thank you very much.

[1:02:44] Okay, have a good day.

[1:02:45] Bye.

[1:02:46] DeAndre had to leave us, so you all are fortunate

[1:02:49] enough to have me for the rest of the meeting.

[1:02:52] Uh, Scott Waggenist?

[1:03:02] Uh, state your, please state your full name, address and, um, zip code.

[1:03:08] Thank you, Mr. Commissioner and members of the Commission.

[1:03:12] My name is Scott Waggenist,

[1:03:13] 40206.

[1:03:16] Um, and that is in part what I am speak

[1:03:19] I

[1:03:20] [laughter]

[1:03:23] raise your right hand.

[1:03:24] Do you solemnly swear to that the testimony you're about to

[1:03:27] give is the truth?

[1:03:28] I do.

[1:03:30] Proceed.

[1:03:33] What I I wanted to bring were several points in support of

[1:03:36] the work thus far in

[1:03:39] by the commission and by the office of planning.

[1:03:44] I'm here to speak on behalf of my family,

[1:03:48] Um,

[1:03:49] my children and their grandchildren

[1:03:51] and my neighborhood of Clifton, which I think is an ideal model

[1:03:55] that is developed over hundreds of years.

[1:03:57] uh, along the Frankfurt Avenue Corridor.

[1:04:00] I've participated in a number of the opportunities to learn

[1:04:04] more about the plan and the LDC through the the planning

[1:04:09] Commission, the office of planning

[1:04:13] and their outreach to communities.

[1:04:15] And we've been able to tour what I think are successful designs

[1:04:19] in the city now.

[1:04:22] I'm also on the staff of AARP Kentucky.

[1:04:26] And I'm speaking on in part on behalf of that,

[1:04:29] and we do support passage of the LDC as drafted.

[1:04:33] For a number of reasons, primarily expanding housing options

[1:04:38] is good for communities,

[1:04:40] and communities that have a thoughtful and long-term plan

[1:04:43] are going to succeed more

[1:04:46] when they're able to provide accessible, affordable,

[1:04:49] um, opportunities for individuals to live in

[1:04:53] multi-generational units,

[1:04:56] to age in their neighborhood, which is something we hear repeatedly

[1:04:59] with the AARP research is individuals want to live

[1:05:03] in their own homes or downscale.

[1:05:07] downsize rather into smaller units.

[1:05:11] The walkability aspects that are built into the plan are, I

[1:05:14] think, exceptional and thoughtful

[1:05:16] and we would certainly support that.

[1:05:20] Um, but I just primarily wanted to offer our support

[1:05:23] and my support as a Louisvillian

[1:05:25] for the passage of the plan as drafted.

[1:05:29] And I'll take any questions that you might have.

[1:05:32] Any questions for Scott?

[1:05:36] Thank you very much. Thanks.

[1:05:38] Uh, we have seven people that have signed up,

[1:05:41] and I'm going to ask you to stand when I call your name.

[1:05:44] We'll swear you all in at one time and then I'll recall your name to

[1:05:49] come up one, one uh, one at a time to uh,

[1:05:52] have your uh speech.

[1:05:56] Nicole Caram

[1:05:58] Owen Graham

[1:06:01] Joan Polley

[1:06:09] Okay, Nicole, I think you signed up twice.

[1:06:13] Steve Porter

[1:06:17] and Ann Ramser.

[1:06:21] I meant to Jacob Post, didn't I?

[1:06:23] No.

[1:06:24] We're just taking testimony, we're not taking in support

[1:06:27] or opposition. Yeah.

[1:06:30] All right, raise your right hand.

[1:06:31] Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give

[1:06:35] uh is the truth?

[1:06:36] I do.

[1:06:37] Okay.

[1:06:41] Uh, Nicole.

[1:06:45] State your name and address, including your zip.

[1:06:47] Just name and zip code is all you need. Yeah.

[1:06:50] Um, my name is Nicole Caram.

[1:06:52] I live in 40205.

[1:06:55] Um, like I said, my name is Nicole Caram.

[1:06:58] I, I grew up here in Louisville.

[1:07:00] I'm from Louisville.

[1:07:01] I grew up in the Highlands.

[1:07:03] Um, I grew up walking on Bardstown Road with my friends,

[1:07:08] um, after school let out for half days at Assumption,

[1:07:13] um, I grew up showing all my friends from the East End

[1:07:17] all of the great things about Bardstown Road.

[1:07:20] And I love Bardstown Road and I love Louisville.

[1:07:23] Um, I left for a couple of years to go to law school.

[1:07:27] Um, and when I was in law school,

[1:07:30] I developed a bit of a reputation because of how much

[1:07:34] I talked about Louisville and Kentucky.

[1:07:37] And, um, my friends would

[1:07:40] they knew that that was like 50% of my personality.

[1:07:44] And so, um, I worked for a couple of years

[1:07:47] in Washington DC after I finished law school and,

[1:07:50] um, when my lease was up, I was considering what the next

[1:07:55] few years of my life would look like or

[1:07:58] maybe the rest of my life, and I decided that I wanted to come back home.

[1:08:03] Um, because this is the place

[1:08:06] where my heart is.

[1:08:08] And so I decided to move back to Louisville and now I live

[1:08:12] in an apartment on Douglas Boulevard

[1:08:14] in one of the sixplexes, on the third floor.

[1:08:17] It's a walk up, which is probably not going to be fun in the winter.

[1:08:20] But, um, I moved back in April and I love it there.

[1:08:24] Um, I love that I can walk to the loop, I love that I can

[1:08:27] walk to the farmer's market.

[1:08:28] I love that I can bike to my parents' house

[1:08:30] and take the bus downtown.

[1:08:33] Um, but I rent my apartment.

[1:08:36] Because I want to live somewhere like the Highlands or Clifton or,

[1:08:40] um, Old Louisville.

[1:08:42] And I can't afford to. I can only afford to rent.

[1:08:45] I can't afford to buy a house,

[1:08:47] even though it's just me. I don't have any kids and I have a good job.

[1:08:51] Um, but I can't afford to live in the places in Louisville

[1:08:53] that are walkable. Um, if I want to buy a house there.

[1:08:57] Um, and so I made the calculation

[1:08:59] that at least for now, um, renting an apartment is worth it

[1:09:03] because I get to have the lifestyle that I want and that I love.

[1:09:07] Um, and this bill, if it's passed,

[1:09:10] will make the life that I love accessible to new homeowners,

[1:09:15] Um, to people who want to be new home owners like me.

[1:09:18] Um, to people who grew up in the city and want to make a life here.

[1:09:22] To people who are just learning about the city, who came here

[1:09:26] for a new job or because they got married or because they went

[1:09:30] to school at UVAL and they fell in love with the city.

[1:09:33] Um, I find that people in Louisville are kind of obsessed with Louisville.

[1:09:37] Um, I think it's a good thing.

[1:09:39] And I think that this shows the love that the people who

[1:09:42] have developed this proposal have for the city.

[1:09:47] Um, and passing it would show the care that the people who

[1:09:52] make decisions for the city have.

[1:09:55] Um, I don't know that I have much else to say other than

[1:09:59] I want to be able to keep living in this city in the parts of it

[1:10:03] that I love, walking and biking.

[1:10:04] I want to raise a family in the parts of it that I love.

[1:10:07] love and this makes that accessible.

[1:10:10] So, I hope you recommend passing it. I hope Metro Council follows suit.

[1:10:15] Um, and I am very excited for all of the new and exciting things

[1:10:19] that it brings for the city.

[1:10:21] Thank you.

[1:10:23] [coughs]

[1:10:24] Oh. Sorry.

[1:10:28] Thank you.

[1:10:30] [clears throat]

[1:10:37] Owen Graham, 40215.

[1:10:41] All right, thank you, Commissioners, for hearing us today.

[1:10:43] Uh, so my wife Heather was the first to speak, so you're gonna get a

[1:10:47] a few more details about our story.

[1:10:49] I'm here to speak in favor of neighborhood housing,

[1:10:52] and I want to talk about how that duplex changed my life.

[1:10:56] I moved in in 2012, uh, first as the roommate of the owner,

[1:11:00] a friend of mine.

[1:11:02] Also, his remodeling helper as the building was in need of a lot

[1:11:06] of fixes.

[1:11:08] Um, later, he got married, then I got married,

[1:11:11] and uh, we split it up, and we ran the building like a co-op, two units,

[1:11:15] one family upstairs and one family down.

[1:11:18] After a few years, then they moved to another home, and we bought them out

[1:11:22] and we became owner-occupant landlords.

[1:11:26] You will never see a landlord with more skin in the game than an owner occupant.

[1:11:31] It changes the relationship entirely.

[1:11:33] You have to be neighbors, you have to care about the quality of the home like it's your own, because it is.

[1:11:39] We worked hard to keep it safe, warm, clean,

[1:11:42] and we often accepted delayed payments from good tenants who

[1:11:45] were going through tough times to make sure that we could keep them.

[1:11:50] Two different times, our tenants moved on to be first-time home buyers themselves.

[1:11:56] We also learned a lot about property management, handling midnight maintenance

[1:12:00] calls, building relationships with reliable trades people for the things that we couldn't do ourselves.

[1:12:06] Between the tenants, we made improvements, carefully considering the long-term value.

[1:12:11] An owner-occupied duplex is a small business incubator,

[1:12:15] a relationship builder, and a leg up on home ownership all together.

[1:12:21] So when we finally moved to our new place, we held out until we were able to sell to another owner-occupant because we knew how good it could be for the community.

[1:12:29] I'm proud to say we left that house in better shape than we found it.

[1:12:32] But most of all, I'm proud to say that in 13 years, no one was ever evicted.

[1:12:37] No one ever had their rent raised.

[1:12:40] In 13 years, nine different families passed through that building

[1:12:45] and four of them ended up as homeowners.

[1:12:48] It adapted to these changing needs over the years,

[1:12:52] in a way that you'll never get with giant complexes.

[1:12:58] So I'm in favor of neighborhood housing because allowing more duplexes, triplexes, all these things that Joel talked about,

[1:13:05] is going to make it possible for more Louisvillians to repeat that story.

[1:13:09] I'm also in favor of it, and I'm glad to see that AARP was here today,

[1:13:13] because now we do live in a single-family home, but we're

[1:13:17] considering building an ADU so that we can take care of our parents as they age.

[1:13:22] Please vote to recommend this the Metro Council,

[1:13:27] so that more people can have chances not only to become home homeowners,

[1:13:32] but to give chances and assistance to others in the way that we did.

[1:13:37] Thank you.

[1:13:41] [clears throat]

[1:13:45] Thank you.

[1:13:56] Hello, my name's Joan Pauli and my zip code is 40223.

[1:14:01] Um, I'm here in in strong support of these changes.

[1:14:05] as a realtor, and also as an aspiring developer builder

[1:14:10] of Cottage Court neighborhoods.

[1:14:13] Um, I love hearing these stories because I hear them every day.

[1:14:17] Um, I primarily focus on first-time home buyers because that's a passion

[1:14:21] for me, and it breaks my heart that the first-time home buyer averages

[1:14:26] 40 years old today.

[1:14:28] Um, and so I I do workshops, I I partner with Young Professional

[1:14:33] Association of Louisville, YPAL.

[1:14:36] And we've given workshops, we've put about 100 people through on first-time home buyer workshops.

[1:14:43] Um, you'd be I mean, I've been surprised

[1:14:46] at the number of people that have moved into Louisville.

[1:14:49] So every time I do a workshop, I ask how many people are from Louisville.

[1:14:53] About half are, but the other half are moving in,

[1:14:55] and they've fallen in love with Louisville.

[1:14:58] And they're renters, and they want to put down roots here.

[1:15:02] But just like you've said, they can't afford these prices for homes.

[1:15:07] We've got more inventory

[1:15:09] on the market right now than we've had in 10 years,

[1:15:11] but there's a mix there's a

[1:15:13] mismatch of the kinds of

[1:15:15] homes that first-time home buyers want.

[1:15:17] They want smaller footprint homes.

[1:15:19] They want to be in walkable

[1:15:21] neighborhoods, just like you've talked about.

[1:15:23] And the more affordable homes

[1:15:25] are out further out,

[1:15:26] and they're not walkable.

[1:15:27] So, I think these changes

[1:15:30] would also, um, help spur,

[1:15:33] The better our economic

[1:15:35] development department does here

[1:15:37] to bring new businesses in,

[1:15:39] the more housing we're going

[1:15:40] to need for young professionals.

[1:15:42] So I mainly work with

[1:15:43] workforce housing folks.

[1:15:45] The other part of it that

[1:15:47] I'm really in support of is

[1:15:48] is the development, um, of

[1:15:50] cottage court neighborhoods.

[1:15:52] And the reason why I love this,

[1:15:54] these changes is,

[1:15:56] First of all, it spurs more,

[1:15:59] um, local developers like

[1:16:01] our local renter for the duplex.

[1:16:03] You have citizens building for citizens.

[1:16:06] You've got skin in the game.

[1:16:08] You have infill development,

[1:16:10] so you're going to be a smaller developer,

[1:16:12] rather than the larger

[1:16:14] production home builders

[1:16:15] or apartment builders.

[1:16:17] So, I'm in big support of that

[1:16:19] to help support

[1:16:20] more local developers.

[1:16:22] And also, um, the predictability that comes.

[1:16:26] If this these codes are put in place,

[1:16:28] then perhaps I don't have to hire a land use attorney.

[1:16:32] And that's going to reduce the amount of cost to me,

[1:16:35] which I can pass on to the end buyer.

[1:16:37] So for both of those hats from a realtor perspective

[1:16:41] and a developer builder perspective,

[1:16:44] this is a God send.

[1:16:45] Thank you. I hope you pass it.

[1:16:48] I have a question, um, not sorry, not necessarily for

[1:16:52] Miss Polly, but in follow up to something you just said.

[1:16:56] And again, going back to Commissioner Leonard and

[1:16:59] Commissioner Cheek's and my,

[1:17:01] um, inquiries in terms of those gray areas,

[1:17:07] that are sort of out in suburbia,

[1:17:10] say that Miss Polly had a, you know, four or five acre

[1:17:15] site out there, and she's already expressed her desire

[1:17:20] about doing cottage courts.

[1:17:22] So that would be an option as a buy right,

[1:17:27] provided that you meet the standards type of

[1:17:29] administrative approval, right?

[1:17:32] Yes, and compliance with all the regulations that have been

[1:17:36] proposed and all other applicable regulations in the land.

[1:17:39] Including the subregs, of course.

[1:17:40] Yes. Okay, cool.

[1:17:42] All right. There you go.

[1:17:44] Any other questions?

[1:17:47] Uh, Anne Ramser.

[1:18:03] I'm Anne Hamster and I'm going to give you my street

[1:18:05] address because it's important.

[1:18:06] 307 East Kenwood Drive, Louisville, Kentucky 40214.

[1:18:10] I live on the north side of East Kenwood.

[1:18:13] That area is in the black area up here.

[1:18:17] Right across the street is in the gray area.

[1:18:19] Now I know you have to have an ending line,

[1:18:23] but that I'm a half mile, more than a half mile from New Cut.

[1:18:26] So it's definitely going to affect me.

[1:18:28] And I'm not against middle housing.

[1:18:31] Don't get me wrong on that. They've been talking about

[1:18:34] that for five or six years.

[1:18:36] Middle housing is great.

[1:18:38] What I am against totally and I've given you all a

[1:18:42] lengthy response, I went line by line.

[1:18:45] And some of the things I've heard up here are not accurate.

[1:18:49] But I it's I hope you all have taken the time to read that.

[1:18:52] What I'm against is non-elected, non-appointed

[1:18:55] decision makers without any public input.

[1:18:59] That's simply not appropriate.

[1:19:01] There's no oversight.

[1:19:03] With the ADUs at that time, when it first came through,

[1:19:08] I randomly pulled five examples from their list.

[1:19:11] At that time, I had to do open records request.

[1:19:15] On every one of the five, they had fudged

[1:19:18] one of the standards.

[1:19:20] They didn't follow it to the letter.

[1:19:22] So for them to say, well, we're going to follow the

[1:19:24] standards, that's what they said on the ADUs.

[1:19:27] So, I'm sorry, I don't believe it.

[1:19:30] Um, the on their, um, talking about these, Wabash,

[1:19:36] I included some pictures of a town home that's in

[1:19:39] the town home complex.

[1:19:42] It is horrible. You need to look at those pictures.

[1:19:44] I mean, there's a townhouse on one side of the two houses

[1:19:48] on one side of the firewall, one's got different roofing

[1:19:51] from the other.

[1:19:52] It looks horrible. Uh, and I've given you the pictures.

[1:19:55] When you ask them specific questions, them being

[1:19:59] the office of planning,

[1:20:00] well, what happens if, well, you call 311.

[1:20:03] We're not going to take care

[1:20:05] of those issues that the office of planning.

[1:20:07] crude.

[1:20:08] My next issue is, is if this goes to, don't include almost all of the urban service district.

[1:20:15] Not all of it's included right now. But don't include all of it.

[1:20:19] They referred to short-term rentals.

[1:20:21] Initially, short-term rentals had a lot more areas covered.

[1:20:26] And then it tore apart homes, neighborhoods, Phoenix Hill being one.

[1:20:31] Then they came back and they drew it back in.

[1:20:34] I'm saying start small. Why don't we just include broadway?

[1:20:38] Don't do such a large area of urban service district.

[1:20:41] You can't go back and fix damage you've already done.

[1:20:45] You can only go back and prevent future damage.

[1:20:47] So I'm asking that they do a smaller area.

[1:20:50] Not almost the entire urban service district.

[1:20:53] Um, can I

[1:20:55] And then for the block face, I think 50% is too much.

[1:21:00] I think you need to start again, start small.

[1:21:03] If you find out that it doesn't do any damage to the neighborhoods,

[1:21:07] then you can increase that, but start at 20%.

[1:21:11] And when they're talking three, they said they only three together.

[1:21:15] Well, if you put three multiplexes together, that's 36 units.

[1:21:20] They talked about it. So I'm asking,

[1:21:24] I'm not totally against it, I know we need housing,

[1:21:28] but if you don't do it correctly,

[1:21:30] then you damage the neighborhoods that are here.

[1:21:32] And I am not against middle housing,

[1:21:34] but I am against this being approved by non-elected,

[1:21:39] non-appointed decision makers without public input.

[1:21:42] That's just not appropriate.

[1:21:45] I'm available for questions.

[1:21:47] Any questions, Ran?

[1:21:50] And thank you. Thank you.

[1:21:52] Oh, it's Steve Porter.

[1:22:05] Steve Porter.

[1:22:07] I live in and own with my wife a fourth the 1/4 of a fourplex.

[1:22:12] at 3109 West Tone Way 40241.

[1:22:17] And it's a great place to live, especially after the great big old place I had to take care of before.

[1:22:26] I will try to, you've gotten in front of you, uh, a couple of pages.

[1:22:30] and I'm going to try and summarize some of this because I otherwise

[1:22:34] I'll take more than four minutes.

[1:22:36] I have no quarrel with all the pages of what Joel, Rachel,

[1:22:42] Brian, Joe, and others put together as far as these various duplex,

[1:22:47] triplex, et cetera, the designs.

[1:22:49] I think that is fabulous and I think that is needed in our community.

[1:22:53] And it is needed maybe everywhere in our community eventually.

[1:22:58] But this it before you tonight is 154 pages

[1:23:05] of changes in the land development code.

[1:23:08] Three sections.

[1:23:10] I think you need to do this one section at a time at the very least.

[1:23:17] It's too much too soon at this point.

[1:23:22] There are a couple of things, uh, definition of multiplex,

[1:23:25] I think 12 units is too much, I would suggest eight.

[1:23:28] Then getting into the process of public participation.

[1:23:34] If we're going to have this by right,

[1:23:36] at least let the public know, at least let the neighbors know what

[1:23:41] might be happening next door to them or across the street.

[1:23:46] Have a requirement for a neighborhood meeting.

[1:23:49] And have a requirement that the neighborhood meeting have minutes

[1:23:53] and that those minutes be sent to the planning director before the

[1:23:57] planning director makes that final decision.

[1:23:59] Neighbors just might have some reasons why, whether it's a

[1:24:03] drainage, you know, whatever it might be,

[1:24:05] that this particular lot and this particular proposal does not meet

[1:24:10] the land development code.

[1:24:12] So at the very least, I think there should be neighborhood meeting

[1:24:15] and possibility that uh, the neighbors can then submit uh,

[1:24:22] suggestions, comments, whatever,

[1:24:24] And then ultimately if the planning director goes against the neighbors,

[1:24:28] they could appeal it under 1171.

[1:24:32] Also, I think that the application should require a statement of that

[1:24:37] there are no deed restrictions on the property

[1:24:40] which would prevent the proposal.

[1:24:42] And the uh response from your legal staff would be the city and

[1:24:47] county do not enforce deed restrictions.

[1:24:50] However, in a later portion, in one of these 154 pages,

[1:24:55] there's a statement that says,

[1:24:57] um, and let's read it,

[1:24:59] "It is important to check a property's deed restrictions for fences."

[1:25:03] Well, if you're checking them for fences,

[1:25:05] why not check them for neighborhood housing.

[1:25:08] And I happen to know that there's one section, a small city.

[1:25:11] Uh, doesn't have zoning power. Then I represent city of Richland

[1:25:16] is on that on that map as being a a prime place.

[1:25:21] Well, let me tell you, the city of Richland

[1:25:24] has deed restrictions that would prevent this.

[1:25:26] I'm sorry to say, I didn't I didn't write those deed restrictions.

[1:25:29] They were in the 1940s.

[1:25:30] But those deed restrictions

[1:25:32] would prevent duplexes or triplexes

[1:25:33] on the individual lots in the city of Richland.

[1:25:37] And I think there're probably some other places in there too.

[1:25:40] So I think you should require that there be

[1:25:43] uh research done by the applicant

[1:25:45] to find out whether there's a deed restriction

[1:25:48] so that you don't just end up somebody starting to dig

[1:25:50] and then all of a sudden the neighborhood

[1:25:53] has to file a lawsuit in circuit court.

[1:25:58] Getting to the section on mixed use and housing.

[1:26:02] I think this should be removed

[1:26:05] or at least considered separately at a later time.

[1:26:09] This was not part this idea of having in the traditional

[1:26:13] neighborhood

[1:26:15] a commercial use on the first floor

[1:26:17] your your four minutes you're out

[1:26:19] of any building

[1:26:22] at any corner

[1:26:24] was not in the original, not in any of these summaries,

[1:26:28] not in any of the uh stuff that's put out.

[1:26:30] That has just kind of become a hidden addition to this.

[1:26:34] So I hope you'll read what I've put out and let's divide this up,

[1:26:38] the devil's in the details.

[1:26:40] The essence is good, the details are not perfect. Thank you.

[1:26:44] Thank you. Does anyone have a questions to Steve?

[1:26:46] No.

[1:26:49] Thank you very much.

[1:26:52] Okay, is there anyone um online?

[1:27:02] I'm sorry.

[1:27:15] Barbara, would you raise your right hand?

[1:27:17] Do you solemn and swear that the testimony you're about to give

[1:27:20] is the truth?

[1:27:21] Yes, I do.

[1:27:22] All right, your full name and your zip code.

[1:27:25] Barbara Kelly, 4009 Men Spring Branch Road.

[1:27:29] I submitted um a number of comments and a lot of them

[1:27:33] have already been addressed.

[1:27:36] Um, there's just a couple of things I want to point out.

[1:27:40] Um, you know, we're not looking at

[1:27:43] um greater incentives for opportunities that we already have

[1:27:49] such as the regarding the high vacancy rate downtown for office

[1:27:54] buildings.

[1:27:55] I think that should be further incentivized to bring more housing

[1:27:59] there.

[1:28:00] And um other factors to consider is the baby boom generation

[1:28:06] is now starting to move out of their large

[1:28:08] homes.

[1:28:09] and to as Steve said, condos and assisted living or beyond.

[1:28:16] So and there's going to be great deal of wealth transfer from that

[1:28:20] generation.

[1:28:21] um, that's going to open up more opportunities.

[1:28:24] And I just saw, I don't know if this in the Courier Journal today

[1:28:29] online, but that

[1:28:30] um, housing stocks have improved. So that's very encouraging.

[1:28:35] And also birth rates have dropped.

[1:28:38] So that demand is going to come down that'll be coming down and

[1:28:42] immigration is slowed dramatically,

[1:28:45] which reduces the need for more housing.

[1:28:47] and we've lost a lot of immigrants from the country.

[1:28:50] Um, some of the problems with urban design concepts current

[1:28:56] countywide bother me.

[1:28:58] Um, right now, we, you know, we've developed as an urban core out to

[1:29:04] the suburban areas and then the ex-urban more rural character areas

[1:29:09] and the the concern is that these more uh rural character areas are

[1:29:15] going to be eaten up with this urban design.

[1:29:19] And I think that's a big loss for the county.

[1:29:23] and the the lot size reduction does seems extreme to me.

[1:29:29] Um, there's no density limit as I understand it for large uh

[1:29:33] subdivisions with neighborhood housing,

[1:29:35] which I don't quite understand when I think of a uh a

[1:29:39] development like uh Norton Commons, which has neighborhood uh

[1:29:45] housing components in it, there is a a density threshold.

[1:29:49] and and I just wonder how you how this works out in terms of

[1:29:54] infrastructure.

[1:29:56] If you have no density limit.

[1:29:59] Um, let's see.

[1:30:03] Uh, I've talked about the uh three distinct types of

[1:30:08] the city and I I just think

[1:30:10] leap frogging into these ex-urban areas

[1:30:13] is going to erase a lot of the scenic quality of our city.

[1:30:16] And we have a very beautiful city.

[1:30:19] I just think people should have maintain a choice.

[1:30:23] I am concerned about the uh not having the transition areas.

[1:30:30] Um, I think transition areas

[1:30:32] are developed to protect neighborhoods

[1:30:34] and they contribute to the quality of life element of desirable cities.

[1:30:40] And I think aesthetics of formed district transitions

[1:30:43] are vital to a well-designed city.

[1:30:47] And now we've this process has gone on for years.

[1:30:51] Joel told us about that.

[1:30:52] We've, you know, some of us have been going to meetings for a long time.

[1:30:55] But when I looked at it in the myths online, it said that

[1:30:59] 800 people had been were part of this outreach.

[1:31:04] And when I think about it and look at the the population

[1:31:07] of the city,

[1:31:10] um, that 800 people represents 1/10 of a percent.

[1:31:14] So 99.9% of the population is not aware of this.

[1:31:20] So I think we need to slow down a little bit.

[1:31:23] Do it in faces. Thank you.

[1:31:27] Any other questions?

[1:31:29] Thank you very much.

[1:31:31] Uh, Donald Taylor,

[1:31:46] Raise your right hand. Donald Taylor, 40291.

[1:31:49] Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give

[1:31:51] is the truth?

[1:31:53] Yes, I do. Proceed.

[1:31:55] Uh, I'm a developer.

[1:31:58] Uh, we do a lot of construction, we do a lot of renovations

[1:32:02] and we do develop as well.

[1:32:04] Um, I spoke with Joe a couple weeks ago

[1:32:08] about some middle housing that we were planning to do,

[1:32:12] uh, right on Chestnut, right off 18th and Chestnut.

[1:32:16] Uh, there's properties down there that have the size,

[1:32:20] that have the aesthetics that that are definitely prepared,

[1:32:24] uh, as far as square footage to be developed into multi-units.

[1:32:30] Uh, the property I'm speaking of in particular

[1:32:32] is a duplex right now.

[1:32:35] Uh, but it has the size to be a fourplex

[1:32:37] and there's other fourplexes in the area and on the same block,

[1:32:43] on the same street, uh, but the

[1:32:47] I guess lot size, the density there would exceed the current plan.

[1:32:52] Uh, um,

[1:32:54] and

[1:32:56] We're talking about preserving an existing structure,

[1:32:59] a vacant property.

[1:33:00] We're talking about bringing it up to a modern aesthetic,

[1:33:03] we're talking about keeping the aesthetic of the area

[1:33:05] and of Louisville.

[1:33:08] And also meeting something that has been publicly discussed

[1:33:12] as a critical problem for Louisville, which is lack of housing.

[1:33:16] And and and affordable housing at that.

[1:33:20] Uh, so

[1:33:22] with this rehabilitation, you know, there's no displacement,

[1:33:24] like I said, it's it's an existing structure,

[1:33:27] it's a structure that's been sitting for a while, vacated,

[1:33:29] uh, dilapidated, and we're talking about bringing it back.

[1:33:34] And and when I hear these testimonies, I know hear a lot

[1:33:37] of people speaking of the gray areas, the white areas,

[1:33:40] this this isn't any of those areas.

[1:33:43] This is a dense populated area that has great walkability,

[1:33:46] proven infrastructure. It has everything need,

[1:33:51] great proximity to shops, hospitals, everything.

[1:33:56] And it's a property that is sitting and just letting to

[1:34:00] uh dilapidated.

[1:34:03] Uh, and I kept thinking on my way down here,

[1:34:07] is it ever a bad time to make the right decision, right?

[1:34:11] This this is the right decision.

[1:34:15] And we're letting uh, I don't even know what to call it, but but but

[1:34:22] this is the right time to make these type of decisions.

[1:34:24] For us to allow these type of opportunities, for us to keep

[1:34:27] loving Louisville, to keep providing for Louisville.

[1:34:32] I quit my job, I'm an engineer by trade.

[1:34:35] That's what I did for years.

[1:34:36] I quit doing COVID, uh, and I came back

[1:34:39] to make a difference in the neighborhood.

[1:34:42] And I do, I serve at Ace mentorships, I've been on the board

[1:34:45] with the academies of Louisville.

[1:34:48] I do all of these things because I love Louisville

[1:34:52] and I try to make housing more affordable

[1:34:54] and available to Louisville.

[1:34:57] And and I think that's one of the ways I would like to get give

[1:35:00] my impact back.

[1:35:02] As well as trying to do things for our youth.

[1:35:05] But then when you get into these situations,

[1:35:08] and you just start questioning our decision making.

[1:35:13] as a whole as a collective.

[1:35:16] Uh, it forced me to come down here and speak to you guys.

[1:35:20] Uh, after a long hot day of working, right?

[1:35:22] I've been outside working today

[1:35:24] so it's been a long hot day on the work site,

[1:35:27] but it forced me to come down here

[1:35:29] and I appreciate the invitation Joel

[1:35:32] because he definitely brought it to my attention about this here

[1:35:34] and I would have never known.

[1:35:36] but it forced me to come down here to speak

[1:35:38] on behalf of supporting uh middle housing.

[1:35:42] I did have one question though in the proposal and maybe I didn't hear it right.

[1:35:48] Uh, it's that no on-street parking, I believe,

[1:35:51] or something like that for these proposed?

[1:35:54] Is that for the rehabilitation?

[1:35:57] Or is that for new construction? I wasn't aware.

[1:36:01] Okay, um, Joel, would you like to respond to that?

[1:36:07] Yeah, I mean, on-street parking would be allowed,

[1:36:10] just as on-street parking is currently allowed.

[1:36:12] But as far as parking in front of buildings,

[1:36:14] parking in front of buildings would not be allowed.

[1:36:17] Um, parking to the rear would be required.

[1:36:21] Um, and as your, um, building a, um, a fourplex.

[1:36:26] Particularly in those hatched areas or in suburban areas,

[1:36:29] there would be parking requirements for off-street,

[1:36:32] but not in our traditional neighborhoods.

[1:36:35] Okay.

[1:36:36] Any other questions?

[1:36:37] Yes, I do have a question from this gentleman's testimony

[1:36:39] and I don't know if it's for this gentleman, it may be for Joel.

[1:36:43] Um, it's probably for Joel.

[1:36:44] So I think often about new construction and vacant land

[1:36:47] because that's where my brain goes.

[1:36:49] But Joel, do you have a feel for the implementation

[1:36:51] of these regulations, how that, what,

[1:36:56] what, is it going to be a significant opportunity for

[1:37:01] some larger older structures to be utilized into

[1:37:06] duplex, triplex, fourplex? What percent, do you have a feel for that,

[1:37:11] for fellows like this trying to save a structure and add housing,

[1:37:15] what component do you see or what kind of bump would we perhaps see?

[1:37:20] Not new construction but existing.

[1:37:23] Yeah, so I mean any any well-crafted regulation is only as good as the education

[1:37:27] we provide afterwards to let folks know what the regulation is itself.

[1:37:33] Uh, like the accessory dwelling unit regulations, we ran an

[1:37:36] education campaign, we did pre-approved development plans.

[1:37:40] So to get this regulation in the hands of individuals to take advantage,

[1:37:44] we have to go out and tell people about it.

[1:37:48] Um, I did mention earlier that, you know, for existing structures.

[1:37:55] Um, an existing structure being renovated into three or four units still needs to meet

[1:37:59] all of our guidelines, uh, for, uh, the neighborhood housing.

[1:38:05] I mean, I think one of the things that, um, you see from time to time

[1:38:09] when a property is converted

[1:38:12] is, um, stairs in the front or stairs in the front or stairs in unsightly locations to provide access.

[1:38:18] Which would not be allowed in our regulations.

[1:38:21] Um, we see properties converted for, uh, boarding houses or group housing,

[1:38:25] which would not be allowed in these regulations or short-term rentals.

[1:38:30] But we, I'm thinking of a case off Dixie Highway where somebody converted a small house

[1:38:34] that maybe had been a fire and a developer bought it and he made it into three units in an R4.

[1:38:41] So I'm thinking of but, but so as long as in the right districts meeting all the code,

[1:38:47] there's ample opportunity of housing stock that could be converted into multiplexes.

[1:38:54] Yeah, there is room for conversion of existing structures.

[1:38:58] Um, it is very important for me to note that they must still meet all building codes,

[1:39:02] ingress, egress, access, they still must meet all building codes and obtain a permit.

[1:39:09] And just because you carved up a house without a permit,

[1:39:13] does not automatically make you legal per these regulations or the building code.

[1:39:17] But it would, it would in certain areas allow

[1:39:20] a duplex or triplex that was not allowable before.

[1:39:25] meeting all the building codes,

[1:39:27] this is an opportunity for some big old houses in Louisville

[1:39:30] to support more house, more families in multiplex units.

[1:39:36] Absolutely.

[1:39:37] Okay, thank you.

[1:39:39] And just kind of a little follow-up. I don't want to get into the details,

[1:39:42] but we had a big old house today that came before the Commission

[1:39:45] in the core part of the, uh, community and it wasn't a slam dunk

[1:39:48] in terms of this was a rezoning application.

[1:39:53] So it's tricky and, uh, and that'll be a, that'll be a challenge for the team.

[1:39:59] Uh, I so, anyway, thanks.

[1:40:02] Any other questions for Donald?

[1:40:04] I got a question for Laura.

[1:40:05] Oh, well, wait a minute.

[1:40:08] related to this gentleman that just spoke. Okay.

[1:40:11] Thank you very much.

[1:40:13] Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity.

[1:40:15] And also, we just finished an ADU, that was great.

[1:40:19] And they love it.

[1:40:21] I'm sorry, but thank you.

[1:40:23] All right, Russ, you had a question?

[1:40:28] Is that going to curtail things or

[1:40:32] easements or City doesn't have any part of that, right?

[1:40:38] Right. So it's it's similar to when um we've had certain

[1:40:41] rezonings or certain development plans that come through

[1:40:45] and there is a deed restriction out there.

[1:40:49] So we stay in our lane and the deed restriction is in their lane,

[1:40:52] so at the end of the day, if they want to come in and fit within

[1:40:57] turning a single family house into a duplex,

[1:41:00] but there's a deed restriction

[1:41:02] that says they can't,

[1:41:04] our land development code's not gonna override the deed restriction.

[1:41:07] Got it.

[1:41:10] Okay.

[1:41:11] Uh

[1:41:12] That was because that was my was going to be my question.

[1:41:15] The Joe, uh our subdivision is within a quarter of a mile

[1:41:22] of what they were talking about.

[1:41:25] And our deed restriction specifically states that

[1:41:28] single family dwelling only.

[1:41:30] So the deed restriction will override this?

[1:41:35] Or or more accurately, we we don't override the deed restriction.

[1:41:38] Huh?

[1:41:39] Well, the the the approval at land development here

[1:41:41] would not override the deed restriction.

[1:41:44] So the deed restriction would stand and carry.

[1:41:46] Yeah.

[1:41:47] Okay, all right, that's that's what I was

[1:41:48] We just don't enforce it.

[1:41:50] You know, at the end of the day,

[1:41:51] it's not our job to enforce the deed restriction.

[1:41:54] We can go ahead and do the approval and that's I think why

[1:41:57] one of the suggestions was, and I think we had this on

[1:41:59] something else and I can't remember what,

[1:42:01] where we said, maybe it was on the accessory dwelling units?

[1:42:04] Yeah, that's correct, on the accessory dwelling units,

[1:42:07] there is just a notation.

[1:42:09] Right.

[1:42:09] There's not a regulation, there is a notation that be aware. Essentially

[1:42:16] is what the regulation reads.

[1:42:17] And um just to just to say that these regulations don't

[1:42:20] as Laura said, override that deed restriction,

[1:42:23] um but we don't enforce that deed restriction

[1:42:26] uh because we're not a party to it.

[1:42:29] So,

[1:42:33] I guess this is my stupidity.

[1:42:35] But if you all okay one of these and it comes into

[1:42:38] our subdivision and they're trying to do it, is it's

[1:42:41] up to the HOA to enforce the deed restriction?

[1:42:45] Yes, because Metro is not a party to the deed restriction.

[1:42:48] So then we have to take those people to court.

[1:42:52] Don't you think that's putting a large monetary issue on the HOA's?

[1:42:57] I mean, you're doing that when you create the HOA and the

[1:42:59] deed restrictions by yourself.

[1:43:01] Now, we didn't create them, the they were required when

[1:43:03] the subdivisions were built back in the 70s.

[1:43:09] Uh, that that was part of the deed restriction that was filed

[1:43:12] with the county before City County merger.

[1:43:16] because a lot of your deed restrictions and HOA's are in the

[1:43:19] suburban area, not the urban area.

[1:43:22] So what you're trying to do is you're trying to

[1:43:25] and don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to argue, but

[1:43:28] you're trying to you you're taking urban and suburban and

[1:43:30] trying to make a rule that is mostly for urban, but it's

[1:43:35] transgression out into suburban that

[1:43:39] every subdivision, HOA, or whatever out there.

[1:43:42] Glendale Mary's one of them.

[1:43:44] Uh, Lake Forest, Apple Valley.

[1:43:47] All of these have these deed restrictions.

[1:43:49] that they're going your office or our office or whatever it

[1:43:52] is is going to okay this.

[1:43:55] Somebody converting a two-story into a duplex in a

[1:43:58] single family dwelling subdivision.

[1:44:01] And then it's up to the HOA, who doesn't charge the amount of

[1:44:05] fees they need to hire a lawyer and go to court over to stop it.

[1:44:11] So that that's where I've got an issue with it.

[1:44:15] And I think part of it in the ADU and and I guess similar language

[1:44:18] could be put in here if it isn't already,

[1:44:21] is is that's why the notation was there warning the person to tread

[1:44:25] carefully because they could end up on the other side of this lawsuit

[1:44:28] and have to defend it.

[1:44:32] And then,

[1:44:33] yeah, I think there needs to be some language there if it it

[1:44:35] if the HOA or or the the

[1:44:38] house falls into a perimeter of an HOA that has that rule,

[1:44:42] then it shouldn't be allowed.

[1:44:45] We won't be able to do that because we're not we we're not

[1:44:47] in the business of enforcing private agreements.

[1:44:49] Whoever gives the permit out for it, it needs to so a red flag.

[1:44:54] Okay, let's um

[1:44:56] I I have one other question if I could.

[1:44:57] Okay. Joel, is there going to be some kind of device added to

[1:45:00] the logic mapping so

[1:45:01] people can so somebody interested in this housing can map

[1:45:05] effectively and

[1:45:09] know what land is

[1:45:10] or they just going to have to take

[1:45:12] the measuring tool and

[1:45:14] So, uh, the the the static map that we showed you on the screen

[1:45:17] screen today is an online map that's available on our website.

[1:45:21] So you can go online right now and zoom in and out of property

[1:45:25] to see if you are in an ineligible area.

[1:45:28] And we can incorporate that into our logic mapping system as well.

[1:45:32] We'll need to work with them on that, but right now there is a tool.

[1:45:35] So I could I'm looking at the map and it's not zooming in very well

[1:45:39] for me, but it might be my Wi-Fi.

[1:45:41] So you've got a static map that somebody looking like the fella who

[1:45:45] just spoke could

[1:45:47] Yeah, Brian can probably walk through you walk walk it.

[1:45:50] All right, so she's looking at the PDF. Uh, there there's an

[1:45:53] interactive map. Now it's okay. No, it's okay.

[1:45:55] Okay, thank you. Yeah, there's an ArcGIS online map,

[1:45:58] similar to logic, on our website that you can you can click on

[1:46:03] and you can scroll through, you can zoom in and out just like logic.

[1:46:09] It's it is not logic.

[1:46:11] But it might be on logic.

[1:46:13] Potentially what we could do if this were to be adopted, uh,

[1:46:16] similar to the tool that we have for uh, short-term rentals and

[1:46:20] you know, other types of mapping, we could create a map that has

[1:46:24] these layers that uh, you know, you again, inner address it goes to it

[1:46:28] and it'll show whether, you know, what area you're in and whether

[1:46:31] you're eligible or not.

[1:46:34] Yeah. And and that that's the thing what the it already exist.

[1:46:37] It's on our website.

[1:46:38] It it it already exists as like a as an as an exhibit to the draft

[1:46:42] regulation. And again if if this were to get adopted, then we could

[1:46:46] make that a formal tool, part of the logic and all that stuff.

[1:46:51] Any other questions for Joel?

[1:46:54] All right. Uh, thank you, Joel.

[1:47:00] Is there anybody online?

[1:47:03] Okay. Is there anybody else here that wants to speak?

[1:47:07] Have you signed up?

[1:47:12] Come forward.

[1:47:21] Now we're going to let this lady speak, but if there's anybody else

[1:47:24] after this, raise your hand now.

[1:47:31] So I'm Mary Cannopel from 40059.

[1:47:35] And Raise your right hand.

[1:47:37] Do you solemnly swear the testimony you're about to give as the truth?

[1:47:41] Yes. Okay. You have four minutes.

[1:47:44] Thanks. I first of all want to applaud all of you for the very

[1:47:47] dedicated and interested uh, presence you are showing and

[1:47:52] revealing to us and it matters a lot.

[1:47:54] All your questions have been so good, and I've really paid

[1:47:57] attention to that.

[1:47:59] I want to applaud Joel and trying to take on a project like this,

[1:48:03] which is enormous and life-changing,

[1:48:05] and the cutiest couples in the world down here are testament to how

[1:48:10] plastic and capable we are as a city to take on our challenges.

[1:48:16] The this is a great idea. It's a very appealing Apple and it seems

[1:48:21] easy and reach.

[1:48:22] There's one deal breaker and that is to to me that the public has

[1:48:26] no opportunity, and I think you brought this up sir, Mr. Lanart,

[1:48:30] um, at the very beginning that they have no opportunity to speak up

[1:48:34] against it.

[1:48:35] We live out in rural section of the East end, and one gentleman

[1:48:40] on our next next to us, um, was going to sell his property and he

[1:48:44] would have a right to do that and develop it, and it might be a good

[1:48:47] development. And it would forever change the nature of our one little

[1:48:51] one-lane road and everybody that lives on it and have lived there

[1:48:55] for over 100 years in some cases. I mean, not individuals, but

[1:49:00] you know, families.

[1:49:01] So, um, I just want to say, I think it's moving a little too fast.

[1:49:05] You're 90% there, and I think if we met if Joel met with Steve Porter

[1:49:10] and worked out these details, you'd be there.

[1:49:13] I I applaud your very careful consideration of all of these

[1:49:17] complex things and the vigor with which we're all as a community

[1:49:21] trying to take on this interesting task. Thank you.

[1:49:25] Thank you.

[1:49:27] Questions? Any questions for this speaker?

[1:49:31] I don't believe there is. Thank you.

[1:49:34] Okay, well, with no one else to uh, testify, let's move into the

[1:49:41] business session here.

[1:49:44] And um, any remarks here?

[1:49:49] Well, I I I surely the goodness we're not going to be voting on

[1:49:54] this tonight, and it's not that it's not important and it's not

[1:49:58] urgent, but uh, there's a lot to take in and I I don't as one

[1:50:03] commissioner, I'm just not ready to you know, to make a a vote on it.

[1:50:08] do think that everybody brought really good comments and uh

[1:50:13] and I do think that, you know, maybe chunking this out into

[1:50:17] more parts that, you know, could be, you know, done separately and

[1:50:22] and terms of separate votes at separate times.

[1:50:25] may be a better way of of going.

[1:50:28] I certainly the neighborhood housing uh part of it is

[1:50:33] the most important and that

[1:50:35] and opens up things.

[1:50:38] I think a separate vote obviously

[1:50:39] you know, the mixed use thing is

[1:50:41] is something that could occur later.

[1:50:43] But I I think we're heading in the right in the right direction.

[1:50:47] And uh and uh but I I'm

[1:50:50] I need to study it some more just

[1:50:52] like probably maybe other people here.

[1:50:56] Brian,

[1:50:57] Yeah, if I can just respond to the

[1:50:59] the you know, we've had a couple

[1:51:01] people that have

[1:51:02] uh talked about, you know,

[1:51:03] breaking it up into chunks or

[1:51:05] pieces and and voting on it.

[1:51:06] It was all put together as a package

[1:51:08] uh at the request of a lot of

[1:51:10] the feedback that we got from

[1:51:12] some of the um

[1:51:13] uh suburban cities, uh both uh

[1:51:15] you know, the home rule cities

[1:51:16] with zoning authority

[1:51:17] and those without, uh as well as um,

[1:51:20] you know, some of our uh suburban

[1:51:22] local officials.

[1:51:23] because they felt that the original draft of the neighborhood housing plan

[1:51:27] was too focused on the suburban

[1:51:28] areas. What were we going to do

[1:51:30] to try

[1:51:31] uh and balance out and provide

[1:51:33] additional development

[1:51:34] opportunities within

[1:51:36] uh, you know, other other areas.

[1:51:38] And so that was why we we

[1:51:39] combined the uh Urban Center

[1:51:41] neighborhood form district

[1:51:42] as well as the corridor uh

[1:51:44] information with the neighborhood

[1:51:45] housing package

[1:51:46] because because we were asked to to do so.

[1:51:48] And so I just wanted to get that out there.

[1:51:53] Steve, did you want to speak?

[1:52:00] One, the lack of opportunity for the public to speak

[1:52:06] on these changes disqualifies this law for approval.

[1:52:11] Second, this proposal

[1:52:13] discriminates against the urban

[1:52:16] service district.

[1:52:19] citizens who have the R4 zoning

[1:52:22] and where it doesn't apply to suburban areas.

[1:52:26] the people in the urban service district pay the 11.8% property taxes

[1:52:33] as do the suburban areas, but

[1:52:35] they also pay a 31.9% tax to

[1:52:37] live in that area.

[1:52:38] So that some of our most vulnerable

[1:52:40] neighborhoods are paying two

[1:52:42] property taxes

[1:52:44] and now they're going to have this dropped on them as well.

[1:52:47] This should apply evenly to all areas.

[1:52:51] Third, this is a

[1:52:54] Well, in the late 60s, early

[1:52:57] 70s, the federal government

[1:53:00] outlawed blockbusting.

[1:53:02] This is a legal form of blockbusting.

[1:53:05] Where unscrupulous people will buy

[1:53:06] a home, say they're going to turn a

[1:53:09] multi-family dwelling and then

[1:53:11] have their unscrupulous

[1:53:13] associates tell

[1:53:14] the neighbors sell your house as

[1:53:16] quickly as you can for as much

[1:53:17] as you can get.

[1:53:20] Fourth, real estate brokers and

[1:53:22] real estate associates have a

[1:53:24] legal and

[1:53:25] ethical obligation to inform buyers

[1:53:27] of this law and its possible

[1:53:29] ramifications.

[1:53:32] That may cause some potential buyers to move

[1:53:39] to the suburban areas.

[1:53:43] The commission has an obligation

[1:53:45] to protect single family

[1:53:46] neighborhoods.

[1:53:48] Housing houses are boring assets that make people wealthy.

[1:53:55] This commission has an

[1:53:57] obligation to protect the value

[1:53:59] of a person's

[1:54:01] most valuable asset.

[1:54:07] The highly respected real estate research firm Zillow based in

[1:54:13] Seattle, Washington, reported

[1:54:15] last week that Louisville is a

[1:54:17] top 10 city

[1:54:19] for first time buyers.

[1:54:21] They also reported that 54% of the current listings in Louisville

[1:54:27] are considered affordable.

[1:54:31] Louisville doesn't have a housing

[1:54:33] crisis, it has a savings crisis.

[1:54:36] because some citizens do are unwilling to sacrifice and to defer

[1:54:43] gratification to save enough money to buy a house.

[1:54:48] Those without resources can take

[1:54:50] advantage of and ask for help

[1:54:52] from the many

[1:54:54] wonderful charitable and civic organizations that will help them

[1:54:59] find shelter and in some cases

[1:55:01] help them make a partial or full

[1:55:03] down payment on a house.

[1:55:09] I would suggest the following alternative.

[1:55:13] The residential, retail and

[1:55:18] industrial categories are very active.

[1:55:22] However, the office category

[1:55:25] has little if any activity whatsoever.

[1:55:29] I would suggest as long as

[1:55:32] the citizens have a right to speak

[1:55:35] before a planning commission committee,

[1:55:38] the full commission

[1:55:40] and even the Metro Council

[1:55:43] that this proposed law

[1:55:45] apply to OR, OR1, OR2,

[1:55:49] OR3, PD and DT.

[1:55:52] This zoning exists from

[1:55:54] Cosmos Dale to Prospect,

[1:55:56] it takes in the urban

[1:55:58] service district areas

[1:55:59] and it includes suburban areas.

[1:56:02] Most of these types of zoning

[1:56:05] are on major arterials

[1:56:07] that are close to retail services

[1:56:11] and in some cases medical services.

[1:56:15] So this law is written

[1:56:17] should be rejected

[1:56:19] and I would hope the commission

[1:56:22] would come back with the alternative,

[1:56:23] start with a smaller zoning category,

[1:56:27] monitor it, see how it goes.

[1:56:30] allow the public to comment

[1:56:32] if it's successful, then we can look

[1:56:36] at other zoning classifications.

[1:56:37] I do not think this

[1:56:39] type of zoning should be

[1:56:40] in any retail or industrial

[1:56:43] classification, especially industrial.

[1:56:45] Thank you.

[1:56:47] Residential is not allowed

[1:56:49] in industrial now, so just FYI.

[1:56:53] Any other remarks by

[1:56:58] Commissioners, what we

[1:57:00] can do here, we can

[1:57:01] vote to approve this,

[1:57:04] we can vote to disapprove it,

[1:57:06] or we can make a motion

[1:57:09] to continue this on to

[1:57:10] the business session,

[1:57:12] the next meeting.

[1:57:15] Uh, I, let me finish.

[1:57:18] I, I think there's um,

[1:57:20] I think this is a good step

[1:57:22] in the right direction.

[1:57:23] And I I know the staff has worked

[1:57:26] tirelessly on this and for years.

[1:57:31] Uh, and I think everybody

[1:57:34] agrees that we need it

[1:57:36] in some form, but there

[1:57:38] are some raw edges on it.

[1:57:39] And as Jim spoke earlier,

[1:57:41] I think uh, he needs

[1:57:44] and I think I've reinforced

[1:57:47] that opinion that we all need

[1:57:48] to be able to sleep on it

[1:57:50] a little bit.

[1:57:53] I agree with you, but I still

[1:57:55] there's there has to be something

[1:57:57] that this can't go in and

[1:57:59] disrupt established subdivisions

[1:58:01] that have these deed of restrictions

[1:58:03] and covenants.

[1:58:05] Well, that's one example

[1:58:07] of several things

[1:58:09] that need to be addressed. Yes, I, yes, yes.

[1:58:11] And I think if there's specific concerns more than just

[1:58:15] reading, I mean it may be that everybody just needs to read

[1:58:18] and then at the next meeting they have some more specific concerns,

[1:58:20] but if there's some specific concerns now that they'd like

[1:58:22] staff for myself to work on between now and the next meeting,

[1:58:25] some direction in that.

[1:58:28] Now, I might be wrong,

[1:58:29] but this small step

[1:58:30] could be a huge leap actually.

[1:58:34] Joel, did you want to say something?

[1:58:35] Laura stated what what I

[1:58:38] was going to state if there's

[1:58:39] I've heard a couple things,

[1:58:40] but if there's any

[1:58:42] more specific direction

[1:58:43] that the planning commission

[1:58:45] uh can give staff I hear

[1:58:47] um the conversation about

[1:58:48] deed restriction,

[1:58:50] um, I hear the conversation about

[1:58:52] applying it to all areas,

[1:58:54] um, as well.

[1:58:59] I'm not sure what other direction

[1:59:00] the planning commission

[1:59:02] has for staff specifically.

[1:59:04] I think you're almost

[1:59:05] there, I think those two

[1:59:06] are main ones that we've addressed,

[1:59:09] but I would encourage the commissioners

[1:59:12] uh to very quickly put

[1:59:14] it in writing and send it to you

[1:59:16] or to Brian or somebody.

[1:59:18] if you have a specific

[1:59:20] interest that you want to addressed.

[1:59:22] several comments related to

[1:59:24] public comment.

[1:59:26] uh increasing the opportunity for

[1:59:28] public participation

[1:59:29] before this is final lies.

[1:59:30] Yeah, notice to the

[1:59:32] notice to the public

[1:59:33] and and maybe a public hearing.

[1:59:36] So similarly to um the changes

[1:59:40] that we're making in chapter five

[1:59:42] uh development plans, there's

[1:59:44] notification of action

[1:59:46] to be taken.

[1:59:47] Is that something that

[1:59:48] the planning commission

[1:59:49] would like to entertain

[1:59:50] with uh neighborhood housing?

[1:59:52] I think that they would

[1:59:53] like to look at it. Yeah.

[1:59:54] I would like to look at it, but then

[1:59:57] I'm thinking about the some of these are going to be

[2:00:00] very small infill projects.

[2:00:02] and as we talked about a

[2:00:03] an amendment

[2:00:05] to the land development code very recently about a

[2:00:07] notice pro provision.

[2:00:09] Right, didn't we just discuss a notice provision

[2:00:11] and it was really adding a a there were very thoughtful.

[2:00:17] Can you speak to that notice? Because I think I don't

[2:00:20] That was the thing about look expanding the tier three.

[2:00:23] Yeah. So that that

[2:00:24] that was a discussion about on zoning changes expanding the

[2:00:28] the number of notices for zoning changes.

[2:00:31] Um I think here, what Joel's referring to, what what has

[2:00:34] been uh written into the proposed changes for chapter

[2:00:37] five for 100% compliant development

[2:00:39] plans is that before staff takes action to approve a

[2:00:43] 100% compliant development plan,

[2:00:46] we are going to send mailed notice and our electronic

[2:00:49] notice to the adjacent property owners informing that action

[2:00:53] will be taken in 14 days.

[2:00:57] So that's sort of what Joel is suggesting with the commission

[2:01:00] be open to that type of notification as well for

[2:01:04] neighborhood housing building.

[2:01:06] I think that's a good provision.

[2:01:07] And it it puts it out there then if a neighbor or a little

[2:01:12] community wants to appeal,

[2:01:16] they could appeal it before decision is made.

[2:01:20] And there is a provision within that if you it'll be

[2:01:22] in your staff report there, I'm not sure what page it's on

[2:01:25] because it's so long, but we can use the similar language that

[2:01:28] it has been recommended for those 100% compliant plans where

[2:01:31] it says that the notice shall be mailed 14 days prior to

[2:01:34] the action of approval and that the case manager shall consider

[2:01:38] any comments that have, you know, that are technical in nature or

[2:01:43] reasonable, for changes to the proposal.

[2:01:47] So if there if a member of the public or an adjacent property

[2:01:50] owner provides a reasonable comment of something that should

[2:01:54] be changed,

[2:01:55] as many folks have said today, we may not know the specifics of

[2:01:58] a property, if an adjacent property owner says, actually

[2:02:01] there's a big hole in the corner back here, we suggest a different

[2:02:04] arrangement,

[2:02:05] then the code asks that that section of the code asks that

[2:02:09] the case manager make that change as long as it's reasonable.

[2:02:14] As long as it's a reasonable accommodation for the applicant.

[2:02:18] Okay, so you had notice.

[2:02:19] I think Commissioner Steph's concern about deed restrictions,

[2:02:23] which apparently we've addressed on ADUs, it seems like maybe

[2:02:28] we have a carry over to neighborhood housing.

[2:02:33] The other matter that again is kind of I've implanted

[2:02:37] in my brain particularly after today's hearings is are we

[2:02:42] disproportionately burdening

[2:02:46] the old city of Louisville limits, you know, or is it

[2:02:52] creating more opportunities?

[2:02:54] I don't know and I think I need a little bit more convincing on

[2:02:58] that.

[2:02:59] Joel, is there a way on kind of relating to the deed

[2:03:03] restrictions?

[2:03:04] Because I run into deed restrictions on land being

[2:03:07] redeveloped and they are private, they have nothing to do with

[2:03:11] the zoning or the binding elements.

[2:03:14] But is there a way in perhaps the application for an applicant

[2:03:17] to kind of ask or just a box for them to check, like have,

[2:03:22] you know,

[2:03:25] just a reminder without burdening government, which

[2:03:28] they are they are private.

[2:03:32] Is there a way to add a check mark to an applicant to say,

[2:03:36] you know, is this property subject to any private deed

[2:03:39] restriction?

[2:03:41] Maybe something as simple as that.

[2:03:42] It would be as basic as I acknowledge that there may be

[2:03:45] a deed restriction, but

[2:03:48] Did we without putting the burden on you, but making

[2:03:50] That's making a developer and I'm sure the that fellow as

[2:03:53] an engineer knows to check all of that.

[2:03:57] But there might be others who don't.

[2:04:00] Did we uh this is Lard.

[2:04:02] Didn't we put a line or something on one of the ADUs on the

[2:04:06] application, on the application there is a statement,

[2:04:09] but there's no checkbox.

[2:04:11] Because we're not, yeah, it was just provides us that restriction

[2:04:13] but we're not doing anything with it.

[2:04:15] It's just something that's there as a gentle reminder.

[2:04:21] Seems reasonable.

[2:04:23] Okay, any other questions that Joel remarks about this?

[2:04:27] And if not, what are we going to do?

[2:04:32] I think we should postpone this to the business section.

[2:04:37] Well, well, if I may,

[2:04:39] so I I think timing wise

[2:04:43] I'm trying to figure out how long we would need and then when it

[2:04:47] would work to bring it back to the commission.

[2:04:50] And so I I I'm sitting there looking at the calendar.

[2:04:53] I'm going to talk to these two three, what I mean, time frame,

[2:04:58] what are y'all thinking on getting changes made?

[2:05:00] If these are the only two changes, we can do that right now.

[2:05:04] We can or I mean, but I'd also be comfortable with the next

[2:05:07] one, the 17th.

[2:05:10] you know, we're behind.

[2:05:11] That's a week before publishing

[2:05:14] of the agenda. And we could we could

[2:05:16] Okay.

[2:05:19] I just didn't... it would be the planning commission meeting in two weeks.

[2:05:23] The agenda would be published roughly a week from today with those changes.

[2:05:28] Yeah, I just want to make sure we're gonna have time to work

[2:05:30] on it because we as you know, we've been working on a lot lately.

[2:05:33] I just want to make sure we're going to be able to get it done in the time

[2:05:37] frame that you all were thinking. So if you are thinking September 17th,

[2:05:41] it sounds like we're comfortable with that and we can we can get something

[2:05:44] turned around and back out to you all back published and and uh so that the

[2:05:47] public can see that. I think that would be better because it's another one of

[2:05:52] these things we don't need to rush, you know. I mean, you all have done a good

[2:05:55] job. I hate to drag it out farther on you all, but this kind of needs to be

[2:05:59] right, you know. Yeah, we recognize you've been working on it for years.

[2:06:04] Uh, but at the end here, we feel like we're at least I do,

[2:06:07] that we're rushing a little bit.

[2:06:10] And several of the testimony people expressed that too.

[2:06:15] So waiting till the next meeting.

[2:06:17] That's that's understandable.

[2:06:18] It sounds like we have a just a few changes we need to make

[2:06:22] and we'll bring it back to the commission.

[2:06:24] If it turns out that during the two weeks you all identify additional things, this

[2:06:31] doesn't bind you to taking final action on the 17th.

[2:06:34] It provides the opportunity, you know, assuming the changes are made and there's

[2:06:37] no other questions, but there's still room for a discussion on the 17th

[2:06:42] and if there's additional changes that come out of that, you know, so.

[2:06:44] So do I hear a motion to I make a motion on case number 26 LDC-0001

[2:06:49] that we continue this to business section.

[2:06:52] Yeah, business session, September 17th.

[2:06:56] Second.

[2:06:57] Roll call properly made motion and second, roll call.

[2:07:01] Chic? Yes.

[2:07:03] Bond? Yes.

[2:07:04] Lehane? Yes.

[2:07:05] Lener? Yes.

[2:07:06] Mims? Yes.

[2:07:09] Steff? Yes.

[2:07:10] Sidner? Yes.

[2:07:11] Fisher? Yes.

[2:07:13] Make a motion we journed.

[2:07:15] We arejourned.

September 3, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting

Transcript