Planning & Public Works Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Planning & Public Works Committee met on January 14, 2014, at 1:00 p.m., with Farmer presiding. The committee addressed five agenda items during the session, taking eight votes and hearing four public comments.

The committee approved the November 12, 2013 Committee Summary. Two items were tabled: a proposal to merge Streets/Roads and Traffic Engineering, and Items Referred. Two additional items were deferred for future consideration: Design Excellence Recommendations and the Planning & Development Fee Structure.

Attendance

The following individuals were present at the meeting on January 14, 2014:

• Farmer
• Mossotti
• Gorton
• Ellinger
• Kay
• Ford
• Lawless
• Beard
• Clarke
• Henson

No absences or late arrivals were recorded.

Votes and Decisions

The following motions were voted on and passed by voice vote during the meeting:

Approval of the November 12, 2013 Committee Summary 3:05 - Motion by: Ford - Seconded by: Ellinger - Outcome: Passed

Motion to remove the item on merging streets, roads, and traffic engineering from committee 7:52 - Motion by: Ellinger - Seconded by: Mossotti - Outcome: Passed

Motion to forward zoning text amendments to the Planning Commission 23:05 - Motion by: Kay - Seconded by: Mossotti - Outcome: Passed

Motion to remove utility poles and repaving program from committee referral list 36:16 - Motion by: Clark - Seconded by: Mossotti - Outcome: Passed

Motion to remove the county public schools salt financing issue from committee referral list 37:21 - Motion by: Mossotti - Seconded by: Mossotti - Outcome: Passed

Motion to remove the sign ordinance revision from committee referral list 39:01 - Motion by: Clark - Seconded by: Mossotti - Outcome: Passed

Motion to remove performance bonds and letters of credit from committee referral list 39:31 - Motion by: Mossotti - Seconded by: Henson - Outcome: Passed

Motion to adjourn the meeting 43:13 - Motion by: Clark - Seconded by: Mossotti - Outcome: Passed

All motions were decided by voice vote with no recorded abstentions.

Public Comment

Four speakers addressed the council during the public comment period on January 14, 2014.

Design Excellence Incentives

Jeff Fugate discussed incentives for design excellence 20:20. He explained that a real estate consultant will be engaged in February 2014 to analyze market support and identify the financial gap for design excellence incentives. A preliminary report is expected to be completed concurrent with the Planning Commission's review.

Commercial Development Fees

Paulson raised concerns about commercial development fees 32:28. He suggested that land disturbance fees for commercial developments may be too low compared to residential fees and recommended a closer review of how fees are differentiated based on development type and scale.

Land Value Analysis

Clark addressed land value considerations 33:33. He noted that land values in Lexington are higher than in surrounding communities and emphasized that a full cost-of-development analysis should include land value, not just permit fees.

Roadway Maintenance

Stinnett requested action on maintenance of major roadways 40:02. He asked that this issue be placed on the next month's agenda to finalize a cost estimate for budgeting purposes.

Contested Items

The January 14, 2014 meeting included two significant areas of disagreement among council members.

Design Excellence Task Force Board Composition

Council members were divided on the appropriate makeup of the Design Excellence Task Force Board. The dispute centered on whether the board should include non-design professionals, real estate experts, and citizen representatives alongside design specialists. Members expressed differing views about the balance between board-driven decisions and staff-driven processes. This split vote reflected broader concerns about governance structure and who should have decision-making authority in design excellence matters.

Incentives for Design Excellence

A heated discussion emerged regarding financial and regulatory incentives for design excellence. Council members debated whether meaningful incentives were necessary to make design excellence standards viable and implementable. A key concern raised was that without adequate incentives, the program would increase development costs for builders and property owners without providing corresponding tangible benefits. This disagreement reflected uncertainty about how to balance design quality goals with practical economic considerations for the development community.

November 12, 2013 Committee Summary

3:05

The committee approved the November 12, 2013 summary without dissent. The summary covered several infrastructure and planning matters:

Topics Discussed

• Capital and maintenance of major roadways
• Sidewalk repairs on Elm Tree Lane
• Design Excellence Task Force recommendations

Key Speakers

The discussion involved Farmer, Wente, Stinnett, Ford, and Beard.

Outcome

The committee approved the summary without opposition.

Merge Streets/Roads & Traffic Engineering

The committee discussed a potential merger of the streets, roads, and traffic engineering divisions during this agenda item 7:52.

Key Participants

The discussion involved committee members Martin, Farmer, Ellinger, and Mossotti.

Outcome

A motion to remove the item from committee passed. No further action was recommended at this time, and the matter was tabled.

Design Excellence Recommendations

Council Member Kay presented the Design Excellence Task Force recommendations to the committee 23:05. The presentation included three main components: zoning text amendments, standards and guidelines, and incentive packages.

What Was Presented

The Design Excellence Task Force recommendations represented a comprehensive approach to design standards in the jurisdiction. The presentation covered proposed zoning text amendments that would formalize design excellence requirements, along with accompanying standards and guidelines to implement those requirements. An incentive package was also included as part of the recommendations to encourage compliance and participation.

Committee Action

The committee took a measured approach to the recommendations, deciding not to approve all components at once. Instead, the committee agreed to forward only the zoning text amendments to the Planning Commission for review at this time. This allowed the Planning Commission to evaluate the regulatory framework separately from the other components.

Outcome

Full approval of all Design Excellence Task Force recommendations was deferred pending completion and readiness of all components. The committee's decision to separate the zoning text amendments from the standards, guidelines, and incentive packages suggests the intention to review and potentially refine the remaining elements before bringing them forward for final consideration.

The key speakers on this agenda item were Council Member Kay and Fugate.

Planning & Development Fee Structure

34:39

Staff presented a comprehensive review of current permitting fees across building inspection, planning, and engineering departments. The presentation examined the existing fee structure and its alignment with operational costs and market conditions.

Key Speakers

Paulson and Clark led the discussion on this agenda item.

Presentation and Discussion

The review covered permitting fees across three main areas: building inspection, planning, and engineering services. Staff analyzed the current fee structure to assess whether adjustments were warranted.

Committee Conclusions

The committee reached the following determinations:

• Residential fees: No changes are recommended for residential permitting fees at this time.
• Commercial fees: The committee suggested that commercial fees warrant further study, with particular attention to land disturbance fees.

Next Steps

A follow-up report addressing the commercial fee analysis is expected by March.

Outcome

This agenda item was deferred, allowing for additional analysis before any fee structure modifications are considered.

Items Referred

36:16

The committee reviewed several items that had been referred for further consideration. During this discussion, the committee removed a number of items from referral status, including:

• Utility poles
• Repaving program
• County public school salt financing
• Sign ordinance revision
• Performance bonds

Two items remained under discussion and were not removed from referral: private streets and the greenway manual.

Key speakers in this discussion included Clark, Mossotti, Johnson, and Schoeniger.

The agenda item was tabled as the outcome of this review.