Planning Commission Meeting

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Urban County Planning Commission convened on August 12, 2010, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers of the Urban County Government Building, located at 200 East Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky. The meeting's presiding officer was not recorded in the available materials. The agenda consisted of three items: PLAN 2010-13P (Fairway Lands, Unit 11), PLAN 2010-73F (Cadentown-Flat Rock Realty, LLC), and DP 2010-15 (Gess Property, Unit 8). All three agenda items were postponed, resulting in no final approvals or denials during the session. The Commission took 3 votes in total, heard no public comments, and no presentations were recorded for this meeting.

Attendance

The following 19 members were present at the August 12, 2010 Commission meeting:

• Mike Cravens
• Mike Owens
• Carolyn Richardson
• Eunice Beatty
• Derek Paulsen
• Hillard Newman
• Jeff Neal
• Bill Sallee
• Tom Martin
• Cheryl Gallt
• Chris Taylor
• Denice Bullock
• Traci Wade
• Jim Marx
• Barbara Rackers
• Charles Bowen
• Allen Case
• Bob Carpenter
• Steven Harrod

No members were recorded as absent or late.

Votes and Decisions

Three motions came before the Commission during the August 12, 2010 meeting, all of which passed. Specific vote counts and individual roll call records were not available for any of the three items. All motions were made by Mr. Cravens; no seconder is recorded in the available data.

• PLAN 2005-269F – Reapproval of Gess Property Unit 2-D 1:14:07: Mr. Cravens moved to reapprove this plat, and the motion passed. The approval was granted subject to the conditions previously approved, with an additional recommendation to monitor USGS data with regard to runoff.

• PLAN 2006-221F – Reapproval of Gess Property, Unit 2-F 1:20:17: Mr. Cravens moved to reapprove this plat, and the motion passed. The approval was granted subject to the conditions previously approved.

• DP 2010-26 – Griffin Gate Office Park Amendment 2:01:39: Mr. Cravens moved to approve an amendment to the Griffin Gate Office Park development plan, and the motion passed. Conditions of approval included building inspections approval of two additions, as well as landscaping and landscape buffers.

No roll call vote tallies were recorded for any of these items, and no votes in opposition or abstentions are noted in the available record.

Contested Items

Griffin Gate Office Park Amendment

The Commission engaged in heated discussion over a proposed amendment related to the Griffin Gate Office Park. The debate centered on non-compliance issues involving building additions that had been constructed, and whether variances would be required to bring the development into conformance.

Commissioners debated the safety implications of the additions as well as their compliance with applicable standards. A particular point of contention was the necessity of an access point to Citation Boulevard, with discussion focusing on whether that access point was essential and how it factored into the overall compliance picture.

The structured data does not indicate the specific individuals involved beyond the Commission itself, nor does it record a definitive outcome of the discussion.

PLAN 2010-13P: FAIRWAY LANDS, UNIT 11

This agenda item was brought before the Commission as a discussion item concerning the Fairway Lands, Unit 11 subdivision plan.

The plan was postponed due to several outstanding issues that required further attention before the Commission could move forward. The specific concerns cited were:

• Proposed geometrics for a new cul-de-sac: Questions were raised regarding the design and layout of the proposed cul-de-sac, indicating that the submitted geometrics were not satisfactory or sufficiently resolved for Commission approval.
• Lack of Tree Protection information: The plan was found to be deficient in that it did not include adequate Tree Protection information, which is a required component of the review process.
• Potential vehicular access conflicts with an existing retaining wall: Concerns were identified regarding possible conflicts between vehicular access points and an existing retaining wall on or near the site, raising safety and design compatibility questions.

No key speakers were identified in the record for this item, and no detailed transcript of the debate or presentation is available. The outcome of the agenda item was a postponement, with the expectation that the applicant would address the identified deficiencies — including resolving the cul-de-sac geometry, providing the required Tree Protection documentation, and clarifying or mitigating the vehicular access conflict with the retaining wall — before returning to the Commission for further consideration.

PLAN 2010-73F: CADENTOWN-FLAT ROCK REALTY, LLC

This agenda item, listed as Item 2, was brought before the Commission for discussion but did not proceed to a full deliberation or vote at the August 12, 2010 meeting.

The plan was postponed due to questions surrounding the absence of tree preservation area(s) proposed within the subdivision. No further details regarding the specific nature of those questions, the parties who raised them, or the timeline for resolution were recorded in the available meeting data.

Outcome: The item was postponed pending resolution of concerns related to the lack of tree preservation areas in the subdivision proposal.

DP 2010-15: GESS PROPERTY, UNIT 8

This agenda item, listed as Item 3 on the meeting agenda, concerned a development plan for the Gess Property, Unit 8. The Commission took up the matter as a discussion item during the August 12, 2010 meeting.

The plan was not approved at this meeting. Instead, the Commission postponed action on DP 2010-15 due to a combination of identified deficiencies and concerns. Specifically, the plan was found to be out of compliance with applicable zoning ordinance provisions. In addition to the regulatory non-compliance, the Commission raised concerns related to:

• Traffic movement — questions about how vehicular traffic would flow through or around the proposed development
• Safety — concerns regarding the safety implications of the plan as submitted
• Connectivity — issues with how the development would connect to surrounding infrastructure or adjacent properties

No key speakers were identified in the record for this item, and no detailed presentation or debate particulars were captured in the available data. The postponement indicates that the applicant will need to address the noted zoning ordinance deficiencies and resolve the traffic, safety, and connectivity concerns before the plan can advance toward approval.

The outcome was a postponement of DP 2010-15.