Planning Commission Zoning Items

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Urban County Planning Commission convened on August 22, 2024, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chamber on the 2nd Floor of the LFUCG Government Center at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Chairman Forester presiding. The commission addressed four agenda items during the session, including routine administrative matters and two development-related proposals. All agenda items were approved by the commission, with a total of six motions and votes taken throughout the meeting. The commission heard five public comments during the proceedings, allowing community input on the matters under consideration.

Attendance

The following members were present at the August 22, 2024 meeting:

• Zach Davis
• Johnathon Davis
• Larry Forester
• Robin Michler
• Bruce Nicol
• Mike Owens
• Graham Pohl
• Bill Wilson
• Judy Worth

Absent: Ivy Barksdale

Late Arrival: Ivy Barksdale

Nine members were present at the start of the meeting, with one member arriving late during the proceedings.

Votes and Decisions

The commission took action on six items during the August 22, 2024 meeting, with most decisions receiving unanimous support.

Minutes Approval 0:02 Mike Owens motioned to approve the June 27, 2024 minutes with correction, seconded by Bill Wilson. The motion passed unanimously 9-0 with all members voting in favor: Zach Davis, Johnathon Davis, Larry Forester, Robin Michler, Bruce Nicol, Mike Owens, Graham Pohl, Bill Wilson, and Judy Worth.

Minutes Approval 0:04 Mike Owens motioned to approve the July 25, 2024 minutes, seconded by Bill Wilson. The motion passed unanimously 9-0 with the same members voting in favor.

PLN-ZOTA-24-00003 Postponement 0:06 Bill Wilson motioned to postpone the Regulation of Solar Energy Systems text amendment, seconded by Johnathon Davis. The postponement was approved unanimously 9-0.

PLN-MJDP-24-00056 Postponement 0:08 Zach Davis motioned to postpone the Red Mile Mixed-Use Development, seconded by Judy Worth. The postponement was approved unanimously 9-0.

PLN-MJDP-23-00064 Approval 2:00 Bruce Nicol motioned to approve the Belmont Farm (Citation Centre) Development Plan with conditions, seconded by Johnathon Davis. The motion passed 9-1 on a roll call vote. Voting in favor: Zach Davis, Johnathon Davis, Larry Forester, Robin Michler, Bruce Nicol, Mike Owens, Graham Pohl, Bill Wilson, and Judy Worth. Judy Worth voted against. The approval included 14 staff-recommended conditions plus an additional condition #15 requiring right-in/right-out with median controls on Georgetown Road at Innovation Drive.

PLN-MAR-24-00011 Approval 3:30 Robin Michler motioned to approve the Beverly A. Chewning Zoning Map Amendment, seconded by Bill Wilson. The motion passed unanimously 10-0, with Ivy Barksdale joining the other nine members in voting in favor. The approval included the condition that no residential units be permitted on the site.

Public Comment

Five community members addressed the board during the public comment period, all expressing concerns about a proposed development and its potential impacts on their neighborhood.

Marcus Rigger opened the public comment session by raising traffic concerns 4:00. He questioned the compatibility of a high-volume curb cut with existing traffic flow and emphasized potential pedestrian safety issues.

Patty Meyer followed, also focusing on safety and traffic matters 4:05. She voiced concerns about how the proposed development would impact both safety and traffic conditions, stressing the importance of proper planning to address these potential consequences.

Ann Green spoke in opposition to a proposed mobile home addition 4:10. Her concerns centered on increased noise and traffic that would result from the development, as well as the negative impact it could have on the historical black community in the area.

Virgil Covington addressed the community impact of the proposal 4:15. He highlighted the historical significance of St. Martin's Village and specifically opposed opening the streets to accommodate the proposed development, emphasizing the importance of preserving the area's character.

Artie Green concluded the public comment period by focusing on community preservation 4:20. Green emphasized the critical importance of maintaining both the community spirit and historical significance of St. Martin's Village, arguing against changes that could diminish these qualities.

All five speakers shared common themes of concern regarding traffic safety, community preservation, and the protection of St. Martin's Village's historical character. The comments collectively presented opposition to the proposed development based on its potential negative impacts on traffic flow, pedestrian safety, noise levels, and the preservation of a historically significant community.

Contested Items

Two development-related items generated significant community opposition during the August 22, 2024 meeting.

Belmont Farm (Citation Centre) Development Plan

Community members raised concerns about the proposed Belmont Farm development, specifically focusing on traffic and safety issues related to planned access points on Georgetown Road. Residents expressed opposition to the proposed entry and exit configurations, citing potential impacts on local traffic patterns and pedestrian safety in the area.

St. Martin's Village Connectivity

The proposed street connections between St. Martin's Village and a new development faced strong resistance from existing residents. Community members opposed the connectivity plans, arguing that the new street connections would compromise the historical significance of their neighborhood and disrupt the established community cohesion that residents have worked to maintain over time. The opposition centered on preserving the character and integrity of the St. Martin's Village area while preventing what residents viewed as unwanted integration with the adjacent development.

Both contested items involved direct community input and opposition to proposed development plans, with residents actively participating in the meeting to voice their concerns about potential impacts on their neighborhoods. The specific outcomes of these contested items were not detailed in the available meeting data.

*Note: Specific transcript timestamps were not available in the provided meeting data.*

Approval of Minutes

0:02

The commission reviewed and approved minutes from two previous meetings during this agenda item. The minutes under consideration were from the June 27, 2024, and July 25, 2024, meetings.

During the discussion, a correction was identified for the June 27, 2024, minutes. The key speakers addressing this item were Mike Owens and Bill Wilson, who participated in the review process and discussion of the proposed corrections.

The commission proceeded to approve both sets of minutes, incorporating the necessary correction to the June minutes. The approval encompassed:

• Minutes from the June 27, 2024, meeting (with correction)
• Minutes from the July 25, 2024, meeting

The outcome was successful approval of both meeting minutes, allowing the commission to move forward with the remainder of their agenda. This standard procedural item ensures accurate record-keeping of the commission's previous deliberations and decisions.

Postponements and Withdrawals

0:06

The commission reviewed requests for postponements and withdrawals of agenda items during this portion of the meeting. Key speakers included Branden Gross and Matt Carter, who presented the requests to the commission for consideration.

Two specific items were identified for postponement or withdrawal:

• Regulation of Solar Energy Systems - This item was requested to be postponed from the current meeting agenda
• Red Mile Mixed-Use Development - This development project was also subject to a postponement or withdrawal request

The commission discussed these requests and ultimately approved the postponements and withdrawals as presented. The specific reasons for the postponements were not detailed in the available summary, but both items were removed from active consideration during this meeting.

This procedural item allowed the commission to manage their agenda effectively by addressing items that were not ready for full review or required additional preparation time before being brought back for consideration at a future meeting.

Belmont Farm (Citation Centre) Development Plan

2:00

The commission reviewed and discussed the development plan for Belmont Farm, also known as the Citation Centre Development Plan, during agenda item 3.

Key speakers during the discussion included Cheryl Gallt and Tom Martin, who presented details and addressed questions about the proposed development.

The primary concerns raised during the discussion centered on traffic impacts and access points for the development. Commission members examined how the proposed Belmont Farm development would affect local traffic patterns and what provisions were being made for safe and efficient vehicular access to the site.

Following deliberation on these traffic and access considerations, the commission voted to approve the Belmont Farm (Citation Centre) Development Plan. However, the approval came with conditions, though the specific details of those conditions were not specified in the available meeting materials.

The approval represents a significant step forward for the Citation Centre development project at the Belmont Farm location, allowing the project to proceed subject to meeting the stipulated conditions established by the commission.

Beverly A. Chewning Zoning Map Amendment

3:30

The commission reviewed and discussed a zoning map amendment request submitted by Beverly A. Chewning during agenda item 4. The discussion involved key presentations from Daniel Crum and Brandon Gross, who addressed various aspects of the proposed zoning change.

During the deliberations, commissioners examined community concerns that had been raised regarding the amendment. The discussion included consideration of specific conditions that would need to be met as part of the approval process. While the exact details of the zoning change and the specific concerns were discussed, the commissioners worked through the various issues presented.

Brandon Gross and Daniel Crum provided input on different aspects of the proposal, helping to inform the commission's decision-making process. The speakers addressed the technical and procedural elements of the zoning amendment request.

After reviewing the materials presented and discussing the community feedback and conditions associated with the request, the commission moved forward with their decision. The Beverly A. Chewning Zoning Map Amendment was ultimately approved by the commission.

The approval came following the comprehensive discussion of the various factors involved in the zoning change, including the community input that had been received and the specific conditions that were part of the proposal. The commission's decision concluded this agenda item with a positive outcome for the applicant.