Council Planning & Zoning Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Planning & Zoning Committee met on July 5, 2011, at 1:00 p.m., with Farmer presiding. The committee addressed three agenda items during the session. No votes were taken during the meeting. The committee heard three public comments and received one informational presentation on Complete Streets. Two of the three agenda items—the Comprehensive Plan Goals & Objectives Update and Items Referred to Committee—were deferred for future consideration.

Attendance

The following individuals were present at the meeting on July 5, 2011:

• Farmer
• Ellinger
• Gorton
• Kay
• Ford
• Blues
• Beard

No absences or late arrivals were recorded.

Public Comment

Three speakers addressed the committee during the public comment period.

Vice Mayor Gorton 1:03:53 raised concerns about word choice in the goals and objectives section. He expressed that the use of the word "compel" may be misleading and recommended adopting more collaborative language to better reflect regional cooperation.

Bruce Simpson 1:16:22 spoke on the topic of urban service boundary and rural activity center expansion. He suggested that the committee avoid implementing blanket prohibitions on minor adjustments to the urban service boundary or rural activity centers. Simpson emphasized the importance of fair hearings and open consideration of development opportunities, particularly those that could support job creation and economic growth.

Council Member Kay 1:25:18 addressed the balance between urban and rural development. She advocated for including language in the goals and objectives that reflects the community's desire to maintain equilibrium between urban and rural areas, which she identified as a defining characteristic of Lexington-Fayette County.

Contested Items

The July 5, 2011 meeting included two significant areas of disagreement among council members and participants.

Use of the word 'compel' in regional planning goal

Council members debated the language proposed for a regional planning goal, specifically objecting to the use of the term "compel." Members argued that this word was too strong and potentially misleading, as it could imply coercion rather than reflect the collaborative nature intended for regional partnership. Several council members recommended replacing "compel" with more cooperative language that would better align with the goal's actual intent of fostering regional cooperation rather than imposing mandatory requirements.

Potential prohibition on rural activity center expansion

A heated discussion arose regarding concerns that the draft goals and objectives might implicitly preclude future expansion of rural activity centers. Participants raised concerns about the economic importance of these centers and worried that the proposed language could create blanket restrictions on their growth. A citizen advocate emphasized the need for open hearings and case-by-case evaluation of expansion proposals rather than implementing categorical prohibitions on rural activity center development.

Comprehensive Plan Goals & Objectives Update

31:55

The committee discussed a draft set of concise, aspirational goals and objectives for the 2012 Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission presented a revised mission statement and five thematic goals designed to guide the plan's development.

Key Themes

The proposed goals and objectives emphasized the following themes:

• Growing successful neighborhoods
• Protecting the environment
• Creating jobs and prosperity
• Improving community desirability
• Regional planning

Presentation and Discussion

The Planning Commission's revised framework prioritized flexibility, public engagement, and future adaptability. Key speakers in the discussion included Chris King, Jim Duncan, Carolyn Richardson, and Ed Holmes, who engaged with the presented material and provided input on the proposed direction.

Outcome

The discussion was deferred, indicating that the committee did not reach a final decision on the goals and objectives at this meeting and would revisit the matter at a future date.

Complete Street Presentation

A team from WRT and EHI presented the Draft Complete Streets Manual to the meeting. The presentation was delivered by Mami Hara, Ed Holmes, and Judy Needham. 0:00

The presentation outlined a holistic approach to street design that integrates multiple objectives and user needs. The Complete Streets Manual emphasized four core principles:

• Safety for all street users
• Environmental sustainability
• Economic competitiveness
• Equitable access for all users

The team highlighted the importance of several key design considerations:

• Connectivity to ensure streets link effectively throughout communities
• Context-sensitive design that responds to local conditions and needs
• Integration with green infrastructure to support environmental goals
• Coordination with transit planning to support multimodal transportation

The presentation was informational in nature, providing an overview of the draft manual's approach and principles for complete street design.

Items Referred to Committee

The committee discussed matters referred to it regarding housing, infill, redevelopment, and historic preservation. 31:55

Scope of Committee Authority

The committee acknowledged that housing, infill, redevelopment, and historic preservation fall within its purview and are appropriate subjects for committee consideration.

Key Discussion Points

The discussion centered on how new goals and objectives would guide future decisions on land use and development. Committee members examined the relationship between these goals and objectives and two specific planning areas: the urban service boundary and rural activity centers. The committee considered how the proposed framework would apply to development decisions in these areas.

Speakers

The discussion involved Farmer, Gorton, Kay, and Blues.

Outcome

The matter was deferred, indicating that further consideration or action on this item was postponed to a future meeting.