# Planning Commission Subdivision Items - June 12, 2025 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Commission · June 12, 2025 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6455 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6455?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2025-06-12 - **Body**: Commission - **Last revised**: March 1, 2026 - **Length**: 7,501 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1, with speaker labels folded in from Granicus closed-captioning. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Urban County Planning Commission convened on June 12, 2025, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers of the Urban County Government Building, located at 200 East Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky, with Larry Forester presiding. The meeting addressed 2 agenda items, resulting in one approval and one matter tabled for further consideration. Over the course of the meeting, commissioners took 5 votes and heard 2 public comments. The approved item was PLN-MJSUB-25-00003 concerning Patchen Wilkes Unit 1, Phase 2, while PLN-MJDP-25-00029 regarding the Coleman Property was tabled. ## Attendance **Present:** Larry Forester, Mike Owens, Judy Worth, Bruce Nicol, Robin Michler, Zach Davis, William Wilson, and Ivy Barksdale. **Absent:** M. Davis, Penn, and J. Davis. **Late:** Ivy Barksdale arrived after the meeting began. ## Votes and Decisions The Commission took five formal votes during the June 12, 2025 meeting. - **Approval of the May 8, 2025 Minutes** [timestamp: 0:01:00]: Motioned by Judy Worth and seconded by Zach Davis. The minutes were approved via roll call vote, 7–0 with 1 abstention. Voting in favor: Larry Forester, Judy Worth, Bruce Nicol, Robin Michler, Zach Davis, William Wilson, and Ivy Barksdale. - **Approval of the Consent Agenda with Exceptions** [timestamp: 0:06:17]: Motioned by William Wilson and seconded by Judy Worth. The consent agenda passed unanimously, 8–0, with all eight commissioners voting in favor: Larry Forester, Mike Owens, Judy Worth, Bruce Nicol, Robin Michler, Zach Davis, William Wilson, and Ivy Barksdale. - **Approval of Performance Bonds and Letters of Credit** [timestamp: 0:06:48]: Motioned by Zach Davis and seconded by Mike Owens. The item passed unanimously, 8–0, with all eight commissioners voting in favor. - **Approval of PLN-MJSUB-25-00003: Patchen Wilkes Unit 1, Phase 2** [timestamp: 0:36:04]: Motioned by Ivy Barksdale and seconded by Judy Worth. The application was approved unanimously, 8–0, subject to 12 conditions as outlined. All eight commissioners voted in favor: Larry Forester, Mike Owens, Judy Worth, Bruce Nicol, Robin Michler, Zach Davis, William Wilson, and Ivy Barksdale. - **Continuance of PLN-MJDP-25-00029: Coleman Property to July 10, 2025** [timestamp: 0:53:59]: Motioned by Zach Davis and seconded by Judy Worth. The continuance passed unanimously, 8–0, with all eight commissioners voting in favor. ## Public Comment Two residents addressed the Commission during the public comment period, both raising concerns related to traffic and safety on Eastland Parkway. - **Barbara Hatton** [timestamp: 11:39] expressed concerns about traffic flow and safety on Eastland Parkway, with particular focus on the opening of Joan Drive for construction equipment. She raised issues about the impact this access point was having on the surrounding area. - **Denise Gray** [timestamp: 15:21] spoke on behalf of residents and echoed similar concerns about traffic and safety conditions on Eastland Parkway. She noted that several accidents had occurred and emphasized the need for traffic management measures to address the ongoing situation. Both speakers centered their comments on the challenges posed by construction-related activity in the Eastland Parkway corridor, with Denise Gray's remarks specifically highlighting a pattern of accidents as evidence of the need for intervention. ## Appointments The Commission made several appointments during the June 12, 2025 meeting. Four individuals were appointed to the Nominating Committee for Commission Officers: - **William Wilson** was appointed to the Nominating Committee for Commission Officers. - **Bruce Nicol** was appointed to the Nominating Committee for Commission Officers. - **Ivy Barksdale** was appointed to the Nominating Committee for Commission Officers. - **Judy Worth** was appointed to the Nominating Committee for Commission Officers. The Nominating Committee for Commission Officers is responsible for identifying and recommending candidates for officer positions within the Commission. The four appointees — William Wilson, Bruce Nicol, Ivy Barksdale, and Judy Worth — will serve on this committee in that capacity. ## Contested Items Two items on the June 12, 2025 agenda drew community opposition from residents. - **PLN-MJSUB-25-00003: Patchen Wilkes Unit 1, Phase 2** — Residents raised concerns about traffic and safety issues stemming from the proposed development, with particular focus on the impact the project would have on Eastland Parkway and Joan Drive. Community members voiced opposition to the development's effects on these roadways, though the structured data does not indicate a final recorded outcome for this item. - **PLN-MJDP-25-00029: Coleman Property** — This item prompted concerns from residents regarding drainage and emergency access in connection with the proposed development changes. Speakers questioned whether the project adequately addressed these infrastructure and safety considerations. As with the Patchen Wilkes item, no final outcome is recorded in the available data. ## PLN-MJSUB-25-00003: Patchen Wilkes Unit 1, Phase 2 [timestamp: 07:18] The Commission took up agenda item 2A, a discussion of application PLN-MJSUB-25-00003 concerning a preliminary subdivision plan for Patchen Wilkes Unit 1, Phase 2. The proposal seeks to revise the existing street layout and increase the number of proposed lots to 115, plus one HOA lot. Key speakers during this item included **Rory Kahly**, **Barbara Hatton**, and **Denise Gray**. The discussion centered on the preliminary subdivision plan's revisions, including the reconfigured street layout and the expanded lot count associated with the development. The item was ultimately **approved** by the Commission. > *Note: The available structured data for this item is limited. For full details on the presentation, any concerns raised, and the specifics of the Commission's deliberation, viewers are encouraged to consult the meeting video beginning at timestamp 07:18.* ## PLN-MJDP-25-00029: COLEMAN PROPERTY [timestamp: 36:34] The Commission took up agenda item 3E, a discussion regarding an amendment to the Coleman Property development plan (PLN-MJDP-25-00029). The proposed amendment sought to reconfigure building square footage, increase lot coverage, and revise the locations of parking and a dumpster on the site. Key speakers on this item included Daniel Rayner and John Woodall. The discussion centered on the proposed changes to the previously approved development configuration, with the reconfiguration of building square footage and the increase in lot coverage representing the primary substantive modifications under consideration. The item was ultimately **tabled** by the Commission, meaning no final decision or approval was reached at this meeting. Further details regarding the specific concerns raised, the nature of the debate, or the reasoning behind the decision to table the item are not available from the provided record. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (7-0): Approval of the May 8, 2025 minutes - **Motion** — passed (8-0): Approval of the consent agenda with exceptions - **Motion** — passed (8-0): Approval of performance bonds and letters of credit - **Motion** — passed (8-0): Approval of PLN-MJSUB-25-00003: PATCHEN WILKES UNIT 1, PHASE 2 with conditions - **Motion** — passed (8-0): Continuance of PLN-MJDP-25-00029: COLEMAN PROPERTY to July 10, 2025 --- ## Full transcript ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ Good afternoon, good afternoon. It is, welcome everyone. It's June 12th, 2025. I want to welcome everyone to the subdivision zoning items meeting. I'd like to call this meeting to order. First on the agenda, I'd like to get the approval from the commissioners for the May 8th, 2025 minutes. We do not have the April 10th minutes. Ms. Worth. I'm not signed in yet. Here we go. Oh, yeah. Okay. Mr. Chair. I move for approval of the May 8th, 2025 minutes as submitted. Great, thank you. Second. Okay, thank you, Mr. Davis. Any further discussion to that motion? Okay, please vote via grant. Motion passes. Next, I don't think we have any postponements or withdrawals. So, staff. Ms. Wade. Thank you. We do have items on the agenda today that also appear on our consent agenda. So, what we do is read through those. And if there's someone from the audience that wishes to have something removed from the consent agenda for a full presentation, I'd ask that you raise your hand when I mention that plan. And then if there are none, the commission would take one motion for all of those items to approve them. So, we'll start with the white sheet from the back of the room. A preliminary subdivision plan recommended for approval by the subdivision committee. It appears on page 2, item 2A of our regular agenda. And that is PLN MJ sub 25-3 for Patchen Wilkes unit 1 phase 2. And this is an amended preliminary subdivision plan for property located at 1811 Winchester Road. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to have this item heard? Are you all here for that? Do you wish for it to be heard by the commission? I just have some questions. Okay. Do you have something to present or say to the commission before they approve it? Yes. Okay. So, we'll pull that one. Next is a final development plan recommended for approval of an extension by the subdivision committee. And that appears on page 2, item 3A. PLN MJ DP 24-30 for Greendale Hills unit 3. Also known as the Downing property for parcels 2 and 3 by the Oakdale Development Group. And that property is located at 2425 Malundy Way. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to have this item pulled? Okay. Moving down the list for final development plans recommended for approval by the subdivision committee. The next item appears on page 3, item B. PLN MJ DP 24-99 for the Givens property. This is specifically for outlot 7 for development of a 7 brew located at 2349 Remington. I think it's Remington Drive rather than Way. Anyone for this item today? Okay. The next item is page 3, item C. PLN MJ DP 25-12 Locust Hill Shopping Center in a B6P area. An amended development plan for a Jaggers for a property located at 3029 Richmond Road. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to have this item heard? Okay. Second page. Our next item appears on page 4, item D of the agenda. PLN MJ DP 25-25 for Enterprise Industrial West, Unit 1, Lots 6, 7, and 8. Also known as the Thomas property. This is for United Contracting. That property is located at 790 Enterprise Drive. Is there anyone that wishes to have this item heard? Okay. And then the last item is on page 5 of our agenda. The top, item E. PLN MJ DP 25-29, the Coleman property. This is an amended final development plan for the Newtown Pike Hampton Inn and Suites. And that is for property at 1880 Newtown Pike and also 1480 Coleman Court. Is there anyone that wishes to have this item heard? Okay. And Mr. Whittle is asking for that to be removed from the consent agenda as well. Are there any other items that the commission wishes to be heard today? Okay. So that reduces our consent agenda, removes item number 1, as well as under section 3, the last item for Coleman property. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Wade. The floor is open for a motion as presented. Yes, Mr. Wilson. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of the consent agenda with exceptions of number page 2, 2A, the preliminary SUV, SUV 25-3, Patchen Wilkes, unit 1, as well as page 5, item E, PLN MJ DP 25-29, the Coleman property. Okay. We have a second by Ms. Wirth. Please vote via Granicus. Okay. That motion passes. Thank you. For the commissioners, if we would like to move forward, can we get the approval for the performance bonds and letters of credit? It's on page 5 of the agenda. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve the performance bonds and letters of credit as outlined on the memorandum dated June 12th from Mr. Fairchild. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you, sir. We've got a second by Mr. Owens. Please vote via Granicus. Okay. That motion passes. Thank you. Staff? 2 of the agenda, 2A. Good afternoon. We're going to start with PLN MJ SUV 25-3. This is Patchen Wilkes, unit 1, phase 2. This property is located out off of Winchester Road. Winchester Road is out in this direction here. Patchen Wilkes comes in this way through here. We already have a large development in this area with single-family homes. When you come through Patchen Wilkes, we have a townhome area also in this area. We're going to go down Patchen Wilkes to a large portion here for single-family dwelling units. This was in front of us not too long ago. It had 69 lots. Now they've revised it and they've come back with 115 buildable lots with one HOA lot right here in the middle. It makes it a little better. We have one HOA lot. The property is zoned R1C for single-family residential. As I said, we have our typical sign-offs. Just had a couple cleanup conditions as far as source of contours. Addition of node 11 making reference to the HOA maintenance. We always want to know how that's going to work for the HOA area. To resolve the access from Patchen Wilkes Drive to the Greenway, we're hoping to have a way to get into this Greenway area here. We wanted to show some type of access. This property up here at the top of the page, I should have explained, is Eastland neighborhood. They are going to have one street that connects in here, Joan Drive. Joan Drive comes down and becomes a cul-de-sac. But then you can tee off and it'll come around to have two access points to get out of this neighborhood. With that, I'll leave it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Any comments or questions for staff? I have one question or comment. I know the part of the neighborhood that was already developed along Winchester Road is developed in that pattern with the main thoroughfare and the back alleys for parking. That's a development pattern that staff has been advocating for in the expansion area. It appears that they didn't continue that pattern here. I'm just asking if there was discussion on that. I believe because they switched developers. The first developer had the access to the driveways in the rear of the property. It was my understanding when they came in with this section here, they wanted to design it differently and to have driveway access out in the front. This is inside the rural service area, so it's not in the expansion area. It's inside 7564. It's just a piece of farmland that hadn't been developed along Winchester Road until now. They've started developing it. Thank you. Thank you. Applicant. Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, Rory Kaley with DA Partners. We are in agreement with staff's 12 conditions. I know there's some folks in the audience who want to talk, so I'll save, I guess, any responses until after that. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kaley. This is time for citizen comments. Mr. Kaley, we just wait since I know you want to respond. So, yes, ma'am, you can step up to the podium, state your name and address. Good afternoon. I'm Barbara Hatton. My address is 1702 Fort Sumter Drive here in Lexington. And I'm part of the Eastland Parkway neighborhood. I'm the president of the neighborhood association there. And so when this first started out, we were very interested in how all this was going to be planned out and laid out, and especially the Joan Drive area. The residents that live on Joan Drive are very concerned about opening that up, and I understand it's going to be one of the main entrances for the construction equipment. So they're concerned about what that's going to do to the condition of Joan Drive and also in and out of Eastland Parkway. There's also going to be another entrance exit in the back of our neighborhood close to Crawford Middle School. And so our main concern is what this is going to do to the traffic flow on Eastland Parkway. We have had at least four major accidents on Eastland Parkway because of speed. So just to increase that traffic flow is very concerning to us. So that's one thing I wanted to bring up today. We visited the houses that will back up to this new subdivision on down on the top of the circle there on Canne Trail Drive. There's a huge barrier, I guess. I call it a hill, but the people that live there said it was a barrier that was made about 15 years ago. And they took debris, is what he called it, to make this huge hill. And it has grass on it now. You wouldn't know what was under there unless he lived there and saw what was dumped there. So we want to know will the houses be on the other side of that hill? Are they going to level that hill? Will their backyards touch the backyards of the houses there along Canne Trail Drive? And the same thing along the Patchen Wilkes subdivision. There's a row of houses down through there. What kind of barrier, if any, will be used to divide those houses that exist now and the new houses that are going to be built? And I'll save—I have a couple of suggestions, but it really doesn't have anything to do with this residential part. So I guess I can save those for a later date. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Ann. Is there anyone else? Okay. Mr. Keeley? Okay. All right. We'll start with the easy stuff. I'll hold. Chair Forrester, Council Member Gray would also like to speak, if you don't mind. Sorry, I ran in with my backpack. I'm a little late. My residents did ask for me to speak, and I'm glad to see that Eastland Parkway Neighborhood Association's President Barbara Hatton was here to speak on behalf of her neighborhood. She spoke of many of the concerns regarding this right here. I just want—since she was here to speak, I really want you to take to heart what she did say. There are issues there, particularly what she said about Eastland Parkway, although we do have traffic management that we can work on with the speeding. But it's actually been over six—not just like little accidents caused by speeding. We had six in the past, say, three months or so, where we're having people using that road as basically a speed—it's a speed road where people go up to 90 miles per hour. So those concerns are extremely, extremely serious that I take to heart. Also, the issue regarding Joan Drive. Have you all been there? Which I'm assuming many of you have not. Many of you have not. I'm just going to go along with that. Joan Drive is a small road that has been basically a cul-de-sac for those individuals there, where there is actual water quality issues that I'm currently working on in that it's bad. It's a flood zone, which has increased with the new development of the Patchin' Wilks, a neighborhood that has been there, in that the water is flooding every single time that it rains to the point of oversaturation. Even a little sprinkle will cause a flood in that area. So just take to heart the considerations of the residents. That is all, and thank you for your service. Thank you. Thank you. Your turn. Okay, Mr. Kaley. All right. The mound—the mound will be removed. I'm pretty sure the topsoil and stuff left over from the unit out in front when it was developed, stockpiled. The lots that we're showing on our development plan, the farm does touch the existing neighborhood. They will be lots to lots. They're both R1C zones. No barriers between like uses, like zones. The Unit 1 phase of Patchin' Wilks did try the new urbanism alleys in the back. It wasn't quite as successful as they wanted. So they're going with a more standard, typical route that seems to be more palpable for most of the purchasers. Joan Drive is a substreet. You've seen me for 30 years down here. Substreets have to connect or have some really good reasons to get a waiver around that. We're showing 115 lots. At over 100 lots, I have to have a second connection. So Joan Drive will be an extension. Most of our construction will come off Patchin' Wilks Drive. I believe most of the marketing will take place from that side as well into this property. I don't see Joan Drive being overly used for construction for that purpose. Patchin' Wilks is a big, wide road. It's fresh. They'll be bringing in all their development equipment that way. Any other questions? Do we have any questions? Yes, Mr. Mackey. I have one question just on the connectivity side. It looks like the, well, it might just be a note, but perhaps you all discussed it. If you live in the existing Patchin' Wilks and want to walk to one of the new neighbor's houses, you'll have to walk all the way out. And then because Joan Drive doesn't go to Patchin' Wilks, it looks like you'll have to walk the block down and all the way around and then back. So we're creating, it looks like one of those sections where someone might live a tenth of a mile and have a mile walk to their neighbor's house. And, you know, as we're looking at reducing vehicle miles traveled and creating a more walkable community, it seems like we are creating a perhaps unnecessarily long, circuitous pedestrian route for neighbors from the old subdivision to the new. Yes, I agree that that would be the pedestrian route to take. That Unit 1 had the alley systems with the driveways in the back. I believe it is being resolved as to what the new lots we're proposing now, although it's a shared property line, the agreements were to not connect back there and let the existing homes use what they've been having as a driveway for the last 15 years as their own. That's just sort of the agreement between the ownership and the development companies from Phase 1 and now. A follow-up question and then another question. I don't remember any discussion of floodplain in the subdivision committee. Can you address that? It's not a FEMA floodplain. If there's water ponding at the end of Joan, it's probably because the farm is a little bit higher. Once we get the street extended, we'll have to design the storm water management. They'll take care of all those problems. Okay. And my second question, and I don't know if this is for you, Tom, I think in subdivision committee, in Mrs. Hatton's letter, but not in her questions here, there was a discussion about access across the street from the school over to the subdivision and what's going in. Different plan, but can you talk about that a little bit? Because we've had conversations about that, and obviously the neighbors have had conversations about safety there. You're talking about the other plan going through the planning commission? Most of you have seen it in one of the committees. It's a zone change for Charleston Drive extension, which would hit Winchester Road at the existing light where the high school is. The master plan for Patchen Wilkes Farm, Patchen Wilkes Farm is a big farm. It's been, I guess we zoned it more than 20 years ago. So this has been on the books. It's developed slower than other areas. The road system would connect the high school, Charleston Drive in the back, Patchen Wilkes Drive that we're showing here would connect around. Earlier this year you certified a preliminary subdivision plan that showed a roundabout. That is where these two streets plus Thunder Stick coming out of Executive Business Park, I think is what that is. Those three streets come together at a roundabout. Out of that roundabout, a fourth leg would travel north, aimed back towards Crawford Middle School and the extension of Charleston Drive coming out of Eastland neighborhood at that point. Timing, that's just a zone change. What we're doing here is well out in front of that. But there are conversations about ways to manage the traffic there to keep people walking back and forth safe. Yes, as we get that intersection approved, I believe that certified plan has been, we've got to go through traffic engineering and the state both with improvements to end that intersection at that light. Thank you. Mr. Kaley, something was said as to a second entrance with the number of units that's going in here. Am I to presume that's Patchen Wilkes? Patchen Wilkes Drive will be our primary entrance and then Joan is the secondary. We have to connect the two so that we never overload one street. Okay, so Patchen Wilkes will be your primary entrance for even construction traffic? Yes. We'll have to have a little bit on Joan because we have to construct two and tie together so it can't be cut off from all development activity. Patchen Wilkes Drive is the much easier route to get everybody in. Looking at the development plan, the other end of Patchen Wilkes, when do you presume that to be available? Well, we've got a little, we've got a good amount of single family lots shown here to get started and we would have to have the other subdivision plan going through the commercial area opposite the school. That would have to be a half mile or so of road to construct. I don't foresee us bringing in a third section of Patchen Wilkes Farm. It's got to be at least a year, I'd say, before they have enough on the ground that they're ready for another bite. Okay, thank you. Mr. Cayley, does this development plan, looking at the aerial photo, how far or how close does the far right lower corner approach the, what is I'm guessing the present main residence at Patchen Wilkes Farm? Does it envelop that or am I going too far? The main farmhouse? Yes. Basically where we have the words Patchen Wilkes Future Development, that will be the house or its side yard. The side yard of the main house? Yeah. As long as one of the descendants wants to still live there, there's plans to keep that house on a very big lot for itself in the middle. Okay, that's great. And then I just want to make sure it's on the record that any future plans we look at, I believe there is a horse cemetery somewhere around the house, if that could just be noted on future development plans. Okay. If it's not moved. Yeah, we've skipped the middle donut, so I don't know what's in there. I know it's the Barnes office. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cayley. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Wilson. One of the things that Councilman Gray indicated is that probably most of us did not know about Joan Drive. Well, I'm one that does because I used to live on Cantrell, which is about a couple streets down. When I moved there, I asked about that sub street because I had some friends who lived there, and we were concerned about it because we didn't know where it was going to wind up in terms of going into another development or whether it was going to wind up in a commercial entity as such. But I understand that. But the one issue that I was struggling with even when I lived there was the issue of the traffic because they are absolutely correct. That is a straight through and you've got Yates. And my son was going to Yates and then he was going to Crawford. I mean, and Dixie. Dixie was also in that mix. Getting across the street was almost like taking the kid's life in your hands, literally, because of the way those cars were rolling up and down the thing. But that's beyond our scope. I just wanted to point out that I empathize with the neighbors related to the speed of people moving in and out of that. Perhaps you all can do something with some traffic calming devices as such. Well, we tried to make it not direct, at least as a cut through for ourselves and them. No, I'm going to secure it. Thank you. Ms. Hatton, do you want to come up and say anything additional? I would like a copy of that new map that you have. The one I have is, well, it doesn't look like yours, so it's old. The map that they just put up? On the screen? Uh-huh. We can get that to you. Okay. All right. Yes, those were the additional comments that I spoke about earlier. I suggested an elevated pedway to go across Winchester Road. I know a lot of us in here have teenagers, and they do not pay attention when they're crossing the road. They're looking at their cell phones. To go across, I think right in that area, I know it's at least four or five lanes of traffic. There was a traffic study done maybe a year or so ago. They put the cameras up there on Winchester Road because we complained. There's no crosswalk from Eastland Parkway across Winchester Road at all. No painted lines for people to cross on. There are no sidewalks. I'm sure you all are aware of that. So people actually take their lives into their own hands when they cross there. And I haven't seen the results of the traffic study, but I work on the entrance, the flowers and the entrance of Eastland Parkway. And I know that they're going in excess of 70 to 80 miles an hour when they're coming down through. They're heading in town, towards downtown. So that's part of Winchester Road and Eastland Parkway as well, like you said. The children are just in a lot of danger when they're crossing the street there. And I've seen young people, maybe not high school age, but in their early 20s trying to get across Winchester Road there. I mean, it's very dangerous. So I suggested in my email an elevated pedway across from Frederick Douglass to the other side to get into this new neighborhood so they can have access to go on back to Kroger. And then something else that I'm very passionate about. I'm a retired teacher, 30 years, in Fayette County Public Schools. And we do not have a branch library that is close to Eastland Parkway or this new neighborhood that they're going to build. So something along that lines maybe could be worked in somewhere in the vicinity of the Kroger or another part of the farm. But those were the other two comments that I had on my email. I just wanted to bring those up. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Henn. Mr. Nicholson. Good afternoon. Nick Nicholson here as well as Mr. Kaley on behalf of the applicant. Since that was kind of new information, I did want to bring up what we were informed at the subdivision committee that the state is looking at this entire area on Winchester Road. They're doing a corridor study similar to what they've done on Richmond Road to try to address more of these global issues that we've been kind of talking about that are off-site up from what this is. And of course, as always, this plan is in complete agreement with the subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance. It is as close to kind of by right development as we have here in Lexington. Happy to answer any questions if you have them. Thank you. You said off-site. She mentioned Pedway across. Is that something that's looking at off-site? That's basically kind of more down towards where the commercial development is going in that's subject to the zone change right now. I believe that's the location because that's right across from the school. Okay. All right. Okay. That kind of answers my question. Thank you. I've got a quick question. Mr. Nicholson. Yeah, sorry. We're discussing now a Pedway for accessibility, which is a good thing. But who is going to bear the burden of the cost of a potential Pedway? Any improvements to a state road in this is funded through the KTC or local participation. A raised elevated Pedway, one would have to be approved by the state. But that would be a kind of major system improvement that the state would then fund. Any type of traffic mitigation to try to address speeding on Eastland can be done through Councilmember Gray's office working with traffic management at LQCG. Wow. Well, this is a good opportunity for Councilwoman Gray's office to push that possibly because that could be a major benefit for our community and not deplete our limited resources considering it's coming from the state. And it makes a lot of sense with the continued push for rooftops that's going to exist out Winchester Road. That could be a wonderful occurrence if we got the proper path to success. So that's really neat. That would be a great thing for our community. As we saw with Richmond Road, when you're doing this type of global study, they look at all kinds of different traffic alternatives to address. I know our cuts, we've talked about them a lot in this room, but they are very new in concept for the city of Lexington. But that's exactly the type of stuff the state really does try to look at to find the best solutions for everyone's safety. Great. Thank you. Ms. Worth. This is, I guess, a request to staff. Ms. Hatton mentioned library. And if you're not down here, it's confusing to know which branches of government certain things need to be relayed to. Would somebody explain to Ms. Hatton who she would need to speak to to try and influence location of a library branch in that area? There would need to be a discussion with the library, Lexington Library, and their board. Okay. If there's not any further questions, I'd like to bring this back to the commission, close this portion out, and open it up for a motion or further questions. Who's got one up? Okay. Ms. Boxdale. Okay. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion of approval for PLNMJSUB253 Patchen Wilks and the 12 conditions. Okay. Do we have a motion? Do we have a second to that motion? Second by Ms. Worth. We do have to get her a new screen. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote via Granicus. Okay, that motion passes unanimously. Thank you, applicant. Thank you, Ms. Hatton. Now, put us on page five. Agenda item E, PLNMJDP25-29, Coleman property. Okay, staff. I'm just waiting for the screen to come up so I can advance the picture on that. There we go. Okay, it's at the end of the agenda. Let's go to the end of the agenda. Oops. Let's go back to that. Okay, we are looking at PLNMJDP25-29, Coleman property, Newtown Pike, Hampton Inn, and Suites. This is an amendment. This property is located out off of Newtown Pike. This is Coleman Drive right here. We have a hotel, and then we have I-75-64 just further to the north. Over here we have the Marriott Hotel at this area. They're in here to propose to put in a new hotel. We had seen this not too long ago, but they're coming back because there were some changes to the footprint of the building. It increased the building square footage and the footprint, so it was reducing our lot coverage. They were also revising some of the parking, and there was a dumpster location. They're revising the parking in this area here. Previously, we had parking that covered the whole area. They were working with engineering, and there's a detention area there. They were asked to remove the parking from that area, so they've reconfigured their parking. When they did that, they had to move the dumpster. Let's see if I can get better. Yes, so they had to move the dumpster from that area, and they placed it over in here. This is an access easement that goes to Marriott. That was part of an emergency access, so they need to make sure that they do not block that emergency access from back and forth to Marriott. The fire department wants to have that continuously open. With that, as I said, they were adding additional building square footage. We have the typical sign-off conditions. First are typical sign-off conditions. We ask for removing the gray shading and hatching, to note review and recommendations of the Royal Spring Wellhead Protection Committee, and clarify numbers in the site statistics for the parking. Just verify the—I came up with a different number on count in the parking spaces, so we want to make sure we get the right number. With that, I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Any comments or questions for staff? Thank you. Mr. Woodall? Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. John Woodall. Usually we let the applicant go first. Mr. Woodall is here to speak on behalf of a neighbor. I thought Mr. Woodall was speaking. Everybody wants to be at the microphone, so jump right in there. Hi, I'm Daniel Rayner with the Urban Engineering Commissioner and Commission Members. I'm just here representing this project. Like Cheryl mentioned before, it was here not too long ago. We actually had a couple of internal minor amendments, kind of typical of architects. They like to change the building sizes, and so that's the main reason we had to come back here for a major amendment, because they needed another 400 square feet for a room or something and bumped it out. They couldn't keep it within the footprint we had, so that's the main reason. But also, in working with engineering, some of the things that Cheryl mentioned, just the way we were configuring it, it was going to work out better if we just removed that space, left kind of that existing detention area, that existing drainage well as is, and they were happy with that. That was something we went back and forth on a lot of different options for that. And so we're actually in agreement with all of the planning's comments as far as that. We've actually already made all the corrections, and they're ready to go back in to them following this meeting, so the gray shading and all that. But yeah, we did move the dumpster location. I guess the plan's not up there, but we did move the dumpster location. We kept that emergency access agreement. That was one thing that came out of TRC. We initially had moved the dumpster just to that area because it made sense. They wanted to make sure they maintained that access, and so we slid that dumpster over. And I think that's actually where we had the little typo on the parking spaces, and so it was a difference of two, and we added those back. So I'll take any questions if you have any. Any questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you, sir. Mr. Woodall. I'll try again. Yes, sir. John Woodall on behalf of the Marriott Owners Group. My client owns the property next door, and I peered on this. It's been a while when we found out about the first development plan being finally approved, and since then we've just kind of been watching the construction plans because my client, we don't have a problem at all with the development. And you would think, well, you don't want another hotel. That's not it at all. We serve different clienteles. Their clientele is more of the short-term traveling public, and ours is more of the long-term. My client's concern has been drainage. This is a major drainage area that comes down through the golf course from Windburn. And if you look close at their plan, there's a drainage reinforced concrete pipe that goes directly into an existing retention pond. But that's going to be removed, and they're going to bend this water four times around the new building. So that's given us some concern. And the only reason I came today, Ms. Schumacher is nice enough to send the agenda to all of us on the service list, and I just happened to see it. So I just wanted to note that because we hadn't been involved in this due process, and now to my recollection, you'll correct me if I'm wrong, but the prior plan I thought the emergency access was closed. It was more or less a crash gate. And now, yeah, it was. So now it's going to be continuously open. So I'd say my client's going to have a problem with that, with people going in and out through our parking lot to this property. So those are the concerns we want to voice. Once again, we're not against the development as a whole. There's just some engineering questions that have to be answered. And we've hired our own engineer and have been assessing these drainage plans as they're submitted. And I heard part of this is to that's what I thought when I looked at it with my magnifying glass at the office, is, oh, we're taking away parking and we're adding a drainage swale. Back. Maybe that's going to help some of these drainage problems. I don't know. We haven't had a chance to assess the numbers yet. So I just wanted to voice my comments for the record on behalf of my client. Thank you, Mr. Woodall. Applicant, do you have anything you wanted to address Mr. Woodall's concerns? Yes. Would you mind flipping to the one that showed the plan? Let's see. There we go. So the original plan had some parking in this area. This is like an existing drainage swale, detention area. It's a very small area in relation to the actual drainage that's coming through there. But what we found out in our modeling and analysis of this whole area, actually about a 200-acre watershed that comes through there. So we have thoroughly modeled it all the way out to the interstate, all the way up to the subdivision above it, and downstream from it as well. And so some of the criteria that we needed to meet from stormwater, just the way we were proposing we couldn't quite meet that. And in our latest conversation with engineering, they essentially said we'd rather you just not affect the existing drainage condition. Leave it as is. And so that's what we've done in removing that actually. So we're not actually affecting, we're not removing any detention or swale. That's staying as is. Our own site has its own stormwater management feature that will be here. It will either be underground detention or some sort of storm sewer down there for our own drainage for our own site. As far as the crash gate, our intention is not to remove that. So if we need to clarify it on the plan, we can add that note back to it. So the intention is for it still to remain as emergency access. We also are in agreement, we don't want flow going back and forth, but we want fire and ambulance to be able to get through there if they need to. Thank you. Mr. Woodall. So, Mr. Gault, does fire want the gate open or closed? Mr. Bates is back here. I believe it's open or closed, but it's just that we want to make sure. They had their dumpsters parked in front of it, and we did not want to have the dumpsters in that location. I apologize. I shouldn't have said open, but we wanted to leave it open so that you could be able to access that through instead of having dumpsters in that way. Okay. Chris, could you? Go to the full plan. Yeah, the full plan. That's what I want to make sure. Okay. All right. Where's my little? The button. Top one. The pointer. Yeah. Top one. Okay. All right. If you look at, I believe it's right there. Can we zoom in on that? Let me see. We can't do that. PowerPoint. Okay. Well, anyway, what it shows is there's a 40, I think it's a 40-inch, it's a concrete pipe that says to be removed. And there it is, right there. So right now, that existing pipe goes directly into their retention basin. What we're going to do, they're going to take that out, and the way I understand it, there's going to be a 90 here and all the way up at the other corner of the building a 90, and then another 90, and then another 90 to get it into the retention area. That's what we're concerned about, is can you slow the flow? You slow down a 200-acre drainage plain. Jahad Helani and his folks, who we retain for our hydrology, and we just have real concerns about it. And obviously somebody else did, too. That's why there's an amended plan. That's all I have. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Woodall. So the 200 acres that he's talking about is coming from the north side, come through the golf course. This storm drainage comes off of their parking lot. There was an existing 40-inch pipe that wasn't in a drainage easement or anything, and so what we're doing is actually we're rerouting that pipe down south towards Newtown and back into the same pond it's been going into. So we've already reviewed that with engineering. Their big concern was making sure, again, we didn't have any adverse effect on the adjoining property. They've already approved that piece. The only piece that we were working on, which is part of this plan, was just the drainage that comes out of the pond this way, and so we've resolved that by leaving the existing condition as is. And all of our site, again, is contained within our site. None of our site drains into that swale or into their pond. Thank you. This is a question for staff. Is this something, it seems like there's some conversations that did not take place or had with Mr. Woodall. Is there a reason, Mr. Woodall, did you state why you didn't know about this? I know you stated how you got the information. I just got the agenda and saw this on the agenda. Nobody's communicated with us since we appeared the very last time. Now, when we were notified that there was, just by looking at Acela, that there was a drainage report submitted or revised when we responded to that. But that's where this was. We weren't aware that there'd been another development plan filed, amended plan. All right, thank you. Ms. Ware? I see Ms. Adkins is here. Have you been involved in conversations about this, and can you clarify a little bit about what we're hearing? Yes, Vaughn Adkins, Engineering. Thoroughbred has been working with our division on and reviewing the models. And yes, this was a recommendation to not disturb the existing drainage patterns. And so they're managing their own stormwater management on their own site. Does that answer your question? Vaughn, wait a second. I'm sorry. So are you saying that not to disturb the existing or what they're proposing is okay? What they're proposing is what we have worked through in the process of plan review. All right. Thank you. Okay. Let's bring this back to commission. It seems like we may have further questions or concerns. Mr. Davis? Mr. Woodall, may I ask you a question? I respect your opinion tremendously, and you've been doing this a very long time, and you have some very specific historic knowledge with this site and the neighbor and your client. Knowing what our job is, do you believe these questions are worthy of a continuance? Yes. Okay. Thank you. I would just like to have our guys at least look at this plan and weigh in on it. You can take it for what it is, I suppose. I respect your opinion. Thank you. All right. The floor is open for a motion. I've got one other question. Cheryl, it sounds as if the previous plan that was before us and that was approved had a crash gate and not just a through access on the front side. Correct. Correct. I had misstated. They had put the dumpster, they relocated the dumpster there, and we wanted to make sure it was left open to be able to use with an emergency gate. I apologize. We didn't want the dumpster in that driveway for the access to go from one property to the next. What I'm seeing, it's not. Right. They moved it out of the access easement. Yes. Quite frankly, and it's just a personal opinion, I didn't remember the crash gate, but I'll take your word for it. Yes. I know I cut through there often, but that's neither here nor there. Thank you. Mr. Davis, you want to do it? All righty. If everyone is finished, I'm prepared to make a motion of continuance. And I suppose that does not carry a specific date, does it? Or is that just when applicant and concerned parties feel that they've come to a resolution and are prepared to bring it back to us? No. In order to continue an item or postpone an item, you do that to a date. To a specific date. Okay. So what would be July 10th, would that be the next logical? That's the next subdivision. That's our next subdivision meeting. All righty. Can we answer these questions within that amount of time, Mr. Whittle, applicant? Yes. All righty. Then I make a motion that we continue this discussion to our July 10th subdivision meeting. We have a motion on the floor. Do we have a second? Second by Ms. Wirth. Any further discussion to that motion? Okay. Please vote via granicus. Okay, that motion passes unanimously. For the continuance to the July 10th meeting. Okay. Next on the agenda is commission items. We're nominating committees for commission officers. So I would like to ask Mr. Nickel, Mr. Wilson, Ms. Boxdale, and Ms. Wirth to be on the nominating committee. I have to be. Well, you should be back. Well, no, but can I do that now even though I don't know whether I'm going to be back or not? We'll find that out after tonight. Yeah, you can. I think you can. I know that happened before. But if for whatever reason things don't work in a direction, then we'll just have to adjust. Yeah. Would you say the names again? Oh, yes. Mr. Wilson, Mr. Nickel, Ms. Boxdale, and yourself. All right. Y'all shaking your heads. I don't know. Ms. Boxdale, you okay with that? I'm okay. All right. I want Ms. Wirth on there. All right. Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. A reminder that the government is closed next Thursday, June 19th for Juneteenth. So there will not be a planning commission work session. Our next meeting is Thursday, July 26th. We'll be back in the council chambers for the zoning hearing. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Duncan. This meeting is adjourned.