Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer pitches 72‑unit senior affordable housing on Murray Street; floodplain and single access raise cost questions
Summary
Pat Sowers presented a concept for a 72‑unit, four‑story senior affordable housing building on a 48‑acre tract off Murray Street, telling the Berea Planning Commission the site likely has only one practical access and that stream/floodplain crossings could add significant costs and affect feasibility.
Pat Sowers, a property developer, asked the Berea Planning Commission for feedback on a concept to put senior affordable housing on about 48 acres off Murray Street.
Sowers said roughly 34 acres of the tract are usable because a large mapped floodplain cuts across the property. “We have a 48 acre tract under contract off Murray Street,” he said, and described “a 72 unit, 4 story building with elevators” intended as a 55‑and‑older community, with duplexes and single‑family lots shown elsewhere on the concept plan.
Sowers told commissioners the site has essentially one practical entrance on Mary Street because topography and the floodplain limit other connections. He warned that crossing the stream will require expensive infrastructure — culverts or a bridge — and that repeated crossings or widening would add substantial costs that could jeopardize the project’s affordability. He said the team is pursuing funding through the Kentucky Housing Corporation; the application is due in September and award decisions are expected in January.
Planning staff said the parcel fronts Mary Street but that a mapped stream and floodplain make an entrance costly. Staff noted an alternate vacant lot at the end of nearby Birchwood would require purchase and still likely would not provide buildable access because of steep topography. Staff also described common mitigation used elsewhere, such as requiring minimum finished‑floor elevations on houses adjacent to floodplain areas.
A commission member cited the city’s Land Management Development Ordinance (LMDO), noting it normally requires more than one outlet for subdivisions but that the Planning Commission may make a written finding when a second outlet cannot be provided. The member said signatures from emergency services on a final plat would typically be a sufficient condition to allow one outlet in constrained sites.
Commissioners and staff discussed options to preserve future connectivity, such as reserving a stubbed right‑of‑way to allow a future road extension and widening of nearby Ginger Lane if adjacent property develops. Sowers said the development team plans to pay for geotechnical and floodplain modeling — a process he said would cost about $8,000 — to verify elevations and stormwater impacts before the funding decision.
The commission did not take action on the concept; members offered feedback and questions and indicated the LMDO provision gives the commission a path to approve a single‑outlet subdivision if the record shows no feasible second connection.
The commission then moved on to its regular business session.
