Planning Commission Subdivision Items

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Urban County Planning Commission convened on February 9, 2023, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers of the Urban County Government Building at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky. The commission reviewed 11 agenda items during the session, with 9 motions and votes taken throughout the meeting. The commission heard 2 public comments from attendees regarding items under consideration.

Of the 11 development projects reviewed, 5 items were postponed to future meetings, including Cherokee Park Subdivision, South End Park Unit 2 (Davis Park), Distillery District West (U-Haul Lexington), Coleman Property (Newtown Pike Hampton Inn & Suites), and Triple Stars Property. The remaining 6 projects received approval from the commission, demonstrating active development review across various sectors of Lexington-Fayette County.

The approved projects included the East High Multi-Use Project, Lexington Mall Lot 6A for Tidal Wave Auto Spa, Bluegrass Business Park Lot 4 (Pemberton Farm), Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project Lot 2, George West Estate Property (Howard Property), and the Hoover & Ford Philpot Evangelistic Association Property (The Fountains at Palomar). Several of these approvals were amendments (AMD) to previously reviewed development plans, indicating ongoing refinements to existing projects in the planning pipeline.

Attendance

The meeting on February 9, 2023 had eight members present and three absent.

Present: • Larry Forester • Headley Bell • Robin Michler • Judy Worth • Ivy Barksdale • Zach Davis • Bruce Nicol • Graham Pohl

Absent: • de Movellan • Meyer • Penn

No members arrived late to the meeting.

Votes and Decisions

The meeting included nine formal votes, all of which passed unanimously with all eight members present voting in favor.

Administrative Items The commission first approved the January 12, 2023 minutes on a motion by Judy Worth, seconded by Graham Pohl. They also unanimously approved the January performance bonds and letters of credit on a motion by Zach Davis, seconded by Ivy Barksdale.

Postponements Five development projects were postponed by unanimous votes:

• PLN-MJDP-20-00074: Cherokee Park Subdivision, Lot 1 & Suburban Court Subdivision, Block A, Lots 1 & 2 was postponed on a motion by Graham Pohl, seconded by Ivy Barksdale

• PLN-MJDP-22-000085: South End Park, Unit 2 (Davis Park) was postponed on a motion by Zach Davis, seconded by Judy Worth

• PLN-MJDP-22-000045: Distillery District West (U-Haul Lexington) amendment was postponed on a motion by Graham Pohl, seconded by Ivy Barksdale

• PLN-MJDP-22-00079: Coleman Property (Newtown Pike Hampton Inn & Suites) amendment was postponed on a motion by Robin Michler, seconded by Judy Worth

• PLN-MJDP-18-00004: Triple Stars Property was postponed on a motion by Judy Worth, seconded by Ivy Barksdale

Approvals The consent agenda was approved unanimously on a motion by Zach Davis, seconded by Ivy Barksdale.

The commission also approved PLN-MJDP-22-00062, the Hoover & Ford Philpot Evangelistic Association Property (The Fountains at Palomar) amendment 9:00. This approval included conditions related to soundproofing and service road design.

All votes were 8-0 with the following members voting in favor: Larry Forester, Headley Bell, Robin Michler, Judy Worth, Ivy Barksdale, Zach Davis, Bruce Nicol, and Graham Pohl.

Public Comment

Two residents addressed the meeting during the public comment period, raising concerns about traffic impacts and infrastructure planning.

Vicki Stevens spoke at 8:00 regarding traffic noise concerns in her neighborhood. Stevens expressed concerns about traffic noise and highlighted the lack of visual screening or noise barriers at the end of Glade Court. She emphasized the need for mitigation measures to address the noise impacts on nearby residents.

Jay Conne addressed the meeting at 8:30 with comments about service road and pedestrian facilities. While Conne expressed overall satisfaction with the plan being discussed, he raised specific concerns about the proposed location of the service road and the adequacy of pedestrian facilities in the project design.

Both speakers focused on infrastructure and traffic-related issues, with Stevens emphasizing noise mitigation needs and Conne highlighting concerns about road placement and pedestrian access while maintaining general support for the overall plan.

Contested Items

The meeting featured one significant contested item that generated heated discussion among participants.

Soundproofing and Service Road Design for The Fountains at Palomar

A contentious debate emerged regarding noise mitigation measures and service road design for The Fountains at Palomar development project. The primary concern centered on potential noise pollution from delivery trucks using the proposed service road and the adequacy of soundproofing measures to protect nearby residents.

Multiple stakeholders participated in the heated discussion, including concerned residents from the surrounding area and representatives from the applicant's development team. Residents expressed worries about the impact of truck traffic on their quality of life, particularly regarding noise levels during delivery hours. The discussion highlighted the tension between commercial development needs and residential community concerns.

The debate focused on technical aspects of the service road design and whether proposed soundproofing measures would be sufficient to mitigate noise impacts from commercial vehicle traffic. Participants examined various aspects of the project's noise mitigation strategy and questioned whether additional measures might be necessary to address community concerns.

The outcome of this contested item was not specified in the available meeting data, though the extensive discussion suggests this issue required significant deliberation among meeting participants before any resolution could be reached.

*Note: Specific transcript timestamps are not available for this contested item discussion.*

Cherokee Park Subdivision, Lot 1 & Surburban Court Subdivision, Block A, Lots 1 & 2

The planning commission considered agenda item PLN-MJDP-20-00074, which involved a proposed amendment to revise the development of Cherokee Park Subdivision, Lot 1 and Surburban Court Subdivision, Block A, Lots 1 & 2.

Bruce Simpson served as a key speaker during the discussion of this development proposal. The amendment sought to modify the existing development plans for the properties in question.

However, the item faced significant procedural and technical concerns that prevented its advancement. The Subdivision Committee had previously reviewed the proposal and recommended postponement due to several outstanding issues. Specifically, the committee identified questions regarding requested variances that had not been adequately addressed. Additionally, the proposal lacked a required tree preservation plan, which is typically a mandatory component of development applications.

These deficiencies in the application materials and unresolved variance questions led to the committee's recommendation that the item be delayed rather than proceeding to a decision. The planning commission ultimately followed this recommendation and postponed consideration of the Cherokee Park and Surburban Court subdivision amendment.

The postponement allows the applicant time to address the outstanding concerns, including providing clarification on the variance requests and submitting the missing tree preservation plan. The item will likely return to the planning commission agenda once these requirements have been satisfied and the Subdivision Committee has had an opportunity to review the completed application materials.

South End Park, Unit 2 (Davis Park)

The planning commission considered agenda item PLN-MJDP-22-000085 for South End Park, Unit 2 (Davis Park), which proposes new multi-family development and a workforce development building.

Clay Johnson served as the key speaker for this item, presenting the development plan to the commission.

The Subdivision Committee had previously reviewed this proposal and recommended postponement due to concerns about the project's compliance with Article 28-4 of the municipal code. The committee identified potential regulatory issues that needed to be addressed before the project could move forward.

Following the Subdivision Committee's recommendation and the concerns raised regarding Article 28-4 compliance, the planning commission voted to postpone consideration of the South End Park, Unit 2 development. This postponement will allow the applicant time to address the regulatory compliance issues identified by the Subdivision Committee before bringing the proposal back for review.

The project, when resubmitted, will need to demonstrate full compliance with the relevant code provisions before the commission can proceed with its evaluation of the multi-family housing and workforce development components of the plan.

Distillery District West (U-Haul Lexington) (AMD)

The Planning Commission considered agenda item PLN-MJDP-22-000045, an amendment for the Distillery District West project, also known as U-Haul Lexington. Nathan Billings served as a key speaker during the discussion of this proposed amendment.

The amendment sought to revise the permitted use of the property, though specific details of the proposed changes were not elaborated upon during the meeting. The item had previously been reviewed by the Subdivision Committee, which plays a role in evaluating development proposals before they reach the full Planning Commission.

The Subdivision Committee had recommended postponement of the amendment due to outstanding questions regarding compliance with Article 19 of the applicable regulations. These compliance concerns were significant enough that the committee felt the issues needed to be resolved before the amendment could move forward in the approval process.

Following the Subdivision Committee's recommendation and the discussion during the meeting, the Planning Commission decided to postpone consideration of the Distillery District West amendment. This postponement will allow time for the applicant to address the Article 19 compliance questions raised by the Subdivision Committee before the item returns to the Planning Commission for further review.

The postponement represents a procedural step to ensure all regulatory requirements are properly addressed before the commission makes a final determination on the proposed amendment to the Distillery District West development.

Coleman Property (Newtown Pike Hampton Inn & Suites) (AMD)

The Planning Commission considered an amendment for the Coleman Property development, identified as PLN-MJDP-22-00079, which involves a proposed Hampton Inn & Suites hotel on Newtown Pike.

Nathan Billings served as the key speaker for this agenda item, presenting details about the proposed hotel development amendment.

The Subdivision Committee had previously reviewed this application and recommended postponement of the item. The committee raised specific questions regarding the project's compliance with Article 16 of the applicable regulations. These compliance concerns were significant enough to warrant delaying consideration of the amendment until the issues could be properly addressed.

The amendment sought to revise aspects of the development plan for the proposed hotel project. However, due to the unresolved questions about regulatory compliance identified by the Subdivision Committee, the Planning Commission decided to postpone consideration of the Coleman Property amendment.

The outcome of this agenda item was postponement, allowing time for the applicant to address the Article 16 compliance issues raised by the Subdivision Committee before the amendment could move forward in the approval process.

Triple Stars Property

The Planning Commission considered agenda item PLN-MJDP-18-00004 regarding the Triple Stars Property during their February 9, 2023 meeting.

Tom Martin served as the key speaker for this discussion item. The Triple Stars Property plan has a history of previous approvals, having been both approved and reapproved in prior proceedings.

However, the item faced complications during the current review process. The Subdivision Committee had reviewed the proposal and made a recommendation to postpone consideration of the Triple Stars Property. This recommendation stemmed from outstanding questions regarding two specific regulatory areas:

• New parking requirements - The committee identified concerns about how the project would comply with updated parking standards
• Article 8 compliance - Questions remained about the project's adherence to Article 8 provisions

These unresolved compliance issues prompted the Subdivision Committee to determine that additional time was needed before the Planning Commission could make an informed decision on the matter.

Following the discussion and consideration of the Subdivision Committee's recommendation, the Planning Commission voted to postpone the Triple Stars Property agenda item. This postponement will allow time for the applicant and staff to address the outstanding questions about parking requirements and Article 8 compliance before the item returns for future consideration.

The postponement ensures that all regulatory requirements can be thoroughly reviewed and resolved before the Planning Commission makes a final determination on the Triple Stars Property development proposal.

East High Multi-Use Project

The East High Multi-Use Project (PLN-MJDP-21-00031) was presented for discussion, with Traci Wade serving as the key speaker for this agenda item.

The project proposal involves adding one single-family dwelling unit to an existing commercial property, representing a mixed-use development approach. This type of development combines residential and commercial elements on the same site.

Prior to the meeting, the Subdivision Committee had already reviewed the project and provided their recommendation for re-approval with conditions. The committee's conditional approval indicates that while they supported the project concept, specific requirements or modifications were deemed necessary for final approval.

The project was ultimately approved during the meeting, allowing the applicant to proceed with the proposed addition of the residential unit to the existing commercial property. The approval suggests that any concerns raised during the review process were adequately addressed through the conditions established by the Subdivision Committee.

This mixed-use approach aligns with contemporary urban planning strategies that promote efficient land use by combining different property types within a single development, potentially providing both commercial services and residential housing in the same location.

Lexington Mall, Lot 6A (Tidal Wave Auto Spa) (AMD)

The planning commission reviewed application PLN-MJDP-22-00074 for an amendment to redevelop Lot 6A at Lexington Mall for a Tidal Wave Auto Spa facility. The proposed amendment addresses building placement and parking circulation improvements for the site.

Traci Wade served as a key speaker during the discussion of this agenda item. The amendment focuses on the redevelopment plans for the specific lot within the larger Lexington Mall property, with particular attention to how the new auto spa facility would integrate with existing infrastructure and traffic patterns.

Prior to the planning commission meeting, the Subdivision Committee had already reviewed the proposal and provided their recommendation. The committee recommended approval of the amendment, though they included revised conditions as part of their endorsement.

The planning commission ultimately approved the amendment for the Lexington Mall Lot 6A redevelopment project. This approval allows the Tidal Wave Auto Spa development to move forward with the building and parking circulation plans as amended, subject to the conditions recommended by the Subdivision Committee.

The approval represents progress on redeveloping portions of the Lexington Mall property for new commercial uses, with the auto spa facility representing a different type of retail service than traditional mall tenants.

Bluegrass Business Park, Lot 4 (Pemberton Farm)(Burke, Hockensmith, & Maggard)(A

The planning commission reviewed application PLN-MJDP-23-00001 for an amendment to the Bluegrass Business Park development on Lot 4, also known as the Pemberton Farm property. The applicants Burke, Hockensmith, & Maggard sought approval for modifications to their existing development plan.

Traci Wade presented the amendment proposal, which calls for the addition of a new 27,600 square foot building and outdoor storage facilities on Lot 3 of the development. The amendment represents an expansion of the current approved development plan for the business park.

Prior to the planning commission meeting, the proposal was reviewed by the Subdivision Committee, which recommended approval of the amendment with conditions. The specific conditions attached to the committee's recommendation were not detailed in the available materials.

The planning commission ultimately approved the amendment, allowing the developers to proceed with their plans for the additional building and outdoor storage area. The approval enables the expansion of the Bluegrass Business Park development as proposed by the applicants.

This amendment continues the development of the former Pemberton Farm property into commercial and industrial uses as part of the broader Bluegrass Business Park project. The addition of the 27,600 square foot building and outdoor storage will increase the overall development footprint on the site.

Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project, Lot 2(AMD)

The planning commission reviewed an amendment to the Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project for Lot 2, identified as PLN-MJDP-23-00002. The proposed amendment seeks to add additional square footage and canopy structures to the existing development plan for Lot 2.

Traci Wade served as the key speaker presenting information about the project amendment to the commission members. The proposal represents modifications to the previously approved development plans for the professional office project.

Prior to the commission's consideration, the Subdivision Committee had already reviewed the amendment proposal and provided their recommendation. The Subdivision Committee recommended approval of the amendment, though their recommendation came with specific conditions that would need to be met as part of the approval process.

The commission ultimately approved the amendment for the Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project, Lot 2. The approval allows the developer to proceed with the proposed additions of square footage and canopy structures to the lot, subject to any conditions established by the Subdivision Committee's recommendation.

The amendment approval enables the expansion of the professional office development on Lot 2, providing additional building space and covered areas that were not included in the original project plans. This modification to the existing approved development represents an enhancement to the professional office facilities planned for the site.

George West Estate Property (Howard Property) (AMD)

The Planning Commission reviewed an amendment for the George West Estate Property, also known as the Howard Property, under application PLN-MJDP-23-00003. The proposed amendment seeks to add building square footage on Lot 1 of the development.

Traci Wade served as the key speaker presenting this agenda item to the commission. The amendment had previously been reviewed by the Subdivision Committee, which recommended approval of the proposal with specific conditions attached.

The commission considered the merits of allowing additional building square footage on the designated lot within the George West Estate Property development. While the specific details of the discussion and any concerns raised by commissioners were not detailed in the available materials, the item proceeded through the review process following the Subdivision Committee's positive recommendation.

Following their deliberation, the Planning Commission approved the amendment to add building square footage on Lot 1. The approval came with the conditions that had been recommended by the Subdivision Committee, ensuring that the additional square footage would meet established development standards and requirements for the property.

This approval allows the property owner to proceed with plans to increase the building footprint on Lot 1 of the George West Estate Property, subject to compliance with the specified conditions set forth by the Subdivision Committee and adopted by the Planning Commission.

Hoover & Ford Philpot Evangelistic Association Property (The Fountains at Paloma)

9:00

The commission considered agenda item PLN-MJDP-22-00062, an amendment for The Fountains at Palomar project involving the Hoover & Ford Philpot Evangelistic Association Property. The proposed amendment sought to revise building configurations, parking arrangements, and circulation patterns on Lots 1, 4, 6, and 8 of the development.

Bruce Simpson served as a key speaker during the discussion of this agenda item. The amendment represented changes to the previously approved development plans for the property.

Despite the Subdivision Committee's recommendation to postpone consideration of the amendment, the commission moved forward with their review. The discussion resulted in approval of the amendment, though the commission attached specific conditions to address concerns that arose during the review process.

The approved conditions focused on two main areas: soundproofing requirements and service road design specifications. These conditions were implemented to ensure the revised development plans would meet appropriate standards and address potential impacts on the surrounding area.

The commission's decision to approve the amendment with conditions demonstrates their approach of working with applicants to address concerns while still allowing projects to move forward when appropriate modifications can be made.