Planning Commission Zoning Items

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Urban County Planning Commission convened on March 27, 2025, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chamber on the 2nd Floor of the LFUCG Government Center, located at 200 East Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky. The meeting addressed 4 agenda items, none of which reached a final approval or denial — the commission postponed three items, including proposed revisions to Article 23A-10 for the Economic Development (ED) Zone, the Rose Holdings-Lexington, LLC Zone Map Amendment, and the Ministerial Review of Development Plans, while the Red Mile Mixed-Use Development item was tabled. Across the meeting, 5 motions and votes were recorded and 8 public comments were heard. No presiding officer is noted in the available meeting record.

Attendance

The following members and attendees were recorded for the Commission meeting on March 27, 2025.

Present: - Larry Forester - Robin Michler - Mike Owens - Bill Wilson - Frank Penn - Bruce Nicol - Johnathon Davis - Molly Davis - Zach Davis - Judy Worth

Late: - Ivy Barksdale

Absent: None

A total of ten individuals were present at the start of the meeting, with Ivy Barksdale arriving late. No members were recorded as absent.

Votes and Decisions

The Commission took action on five items during the March 27, 2025 meeting.

• PLN-ZOTA-24-00006 — Article 23A-10 (Economic Development Zone) Revisions: On a motion by Zach Davis, seconded by Judy Worth, the Commission voted unanimously (10–0) to postpone revisions to the Economic Development (ED) Zone until May 22, 2025. All ten commissioners voted in favor: Larry Forester, Robin Michler, Mike Owens, Bill Wilson, Frank Penn, Bruce Nicol, Johnathon Davis, Molly Davis, Zach Davis, and Judy Worth.

• PLN-MAR-24-00017 — Rose Holdings-Lexington, LLC Zone Map Amendment: On a motion by Robin Michler, seconded by Johnathon Davis, the Commission voted unanimously (10–0) to postpone this zone map amendment until April 24, 2025. All ten commissioners voted in favor.

• PLN-MJDP-24-00056 — Red Mile Mixed-Use Development (Approval Motion): On a motion by Bruce Nicol, seconded by Ivy Barksdale, the Commission considered approving the Red Mile Mixed-Use Development subject to 15 staff conditions and a tree mitigation plan. The motion failed on a roll call vote of 4–7.
• Voting yes (4): Larry Forester, Bruce Nicol, Ivy Barksdale, Bill Wilson
• Voting no (7): Robin Michler, Mike Owens, Frank Penn, Johnathon Davis, Molly Davis, Zach Davis, Judy Worth

• PLN-MJDP-24-00056 — Red Mile Mixed-Use Development (Continuance Motion): Following the failed approval vote, the Commission considered a motion by Mike Owens, seconded by Johnathon Davis, to continue the Red Mile Mixed-Use Development item. The motion passed unanimously (10–0), continuing the matter to April 10, 2025. All ten commissioners voted in favor.

• PLN-ZOTA-25-00001 — Ministerial Review of Development Plans: On a motion by Bill Wilson, seconded by Johnathon Davis, the Commission voted unanimously (10–0) to postpone this item until April 10, 2025. All ten commissioners voted in favor.

Public Comment

Eight members of the public addressed the Commission during the public comment period, with remarks focused primarily on two topics: House Bill 443 and the pending Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment (ZOTA).

House Bill 443

• Walt Gaffield 2:54:07 raised concerns about the bill's removal of discretion in final development plans and argued that the Planning Commission should retain greater authority over waivers.
• Dick Murphy 3:02:49 provided historical context on ministerial actions and expressed concerns about new commercial access standards introduced by the bill.
• Brittany Rothenmeier 3:06:00 focused on the reduction of public input opportunities under the bill and encouraged citizens to contact their state representatives.

ZOTA Process

• Branden Gross 2:58:27 argued that the ZOTA is too broad in scope and recommended that it be separated into multiple, more focused ZOTAs to allow for better analysis.
• Amy Clark 3:08:15 suggested process improvements to the ZOTA and echoed concerns about insufficient public input opportunities.
• Nick Nicholson 3:13:38 requested additional time to review the ZOTA and similarly recommended dividing it into separate amendments.

Public Notification and Engagement

• Patty Drouse 3:20:08 called for improved public notification procedures related to development plans and expressed concern about the lack of meaningful public input in the process.
• Rolanda Woolford 3:23:49 raised broader concerns about inadequate public engagement and notification throughout the development review process.

A recurring theme across multiple speakers was the perceived reduction in opportunities for public participation, both through House Bill 443 and through the current ZOTA process. Several speakers specifically advocated for breaking the ZOTA into smaller components to allow for more thorough review and public involvement.

Contested Items

Two items generated notable disagreement during the March 27, 2025 Commission meeting.

Red Mile Mixed-Use Development

This item prompted heated discussion among commission members and the applicant, centering on two primary points of contention: tree preservation and parking. The structured data does not specify the positions of individual commissioners or the applicant, nor does it indicate a final outcome, but the disagreement was described as significant. The debate over tree preservation likely touched on how existing trees on or near the development site would be handled, while parking concerns are a common flashpoint in mixed-use projects where residential, commercial, and public needs must be balanced.

Ministerial Review of Development Plans

This item drew notable community opposition, with public concern focused specifically on the removal of public input opportunities from the development plan review process. Under a ministerial review framework, applications that meet established criteria are approved administratively without a public hearing, which critics argue limits community members' ability to weigh in on projects affecting their neighborhoods. The extent of the opposition and the Commission's ultimate response to those concerns are not detailed in the available data.

Revisions to Article 23A-10 for the Economic Development (ED) Zone

Agenda Item: PLN-ZOTA-24-00006

The Commission took up a proposed text amendment to modify the Economic Development (ED) zone under Article 23A-10. Branden Gross addressed the Commission on this item, presenting a request for postponement rather than proceeding to a full hearing on the merits.

The stated purpose of the postponement was to allow additional time for further discussions related to the proposed zoning text amendment. No detailed presentation of the amendment's specific provisions, debate over its contents, or public testimony on the substance of the changes was recorded as part of this agenda item's proceedings.

The Commission granted the postponement request. No vote on the substance of the text amendment was taken at this meeting.

Rose Holdings-Lexington, LLC Zone Map Amendment

Petition ID: PLN-MAR-24-00017

The Commission took up a petition filed by Rose Holdings-Lexington, LLC requesting a zone map amendment that would reclassify a parcel from Single Family Residential (R-1A) zoning to Planned Neighborhood Residential (R-3) zoning.

Key Speaker: - Matt Carter

Matt Carter was identified as a key speaker on this item. The available record does not detail the specific arguments presented, concerns raised, or the substance of any debate that occurred during the discussion.

Outcome: The item was postponed. No further details regarding the reason for postponement, the length of the delay, or conditions attached to the postponement are available in the record.

Red Mile Mixed-Use Development

Agenda Item: PLN-MJDP-24-00056 | Outcome: Tabled

The Commission took up the Red Mile Mixed-Use Development proposal (PLN-MJDP-24-00056) as a discussion item, with the conversation centering on two primary concerns: tree preservation and parking.

Key speakers in the discussion included Cheryl Gallt, Eric Sutherland, and Matt Carter. The debate focused on the development plan as presented, with commissioners and participants raising issues related to how the project would handle existing trees on or near the site, as well as the adequacy of parking provisions within the proposed mixed-use design.

A motion to approve the development plan was brought forward but failed to pass. As a result, the item was continued rather than receiving a final decision at this meeting.

No additional details regarding the specific nature of the tree preservation concerns, the parking configuration under review, or the vote tally were available in the meeting record.

Ministerial Review of Development Plans

Agenda Item: PLN-ZOTA-25-00001

The Commission took up a proposed ordinance amendment — PLN-ZOTA-25-00001 — that would update the Development Plan review process and establish objective standards for plan review.

Key speakers on this item included Daniel Crum and Jim Duncan, who participated in the presentation and discussion of the proposed changes.

The amendment was presented as an effort to streamline and standardize how development plans are reviewed, moving toward a ministerial process governed by objective criteria. During the discussion, concerns were raised regarding public input, with commissioners or speakers questioning how the shift to a more ministerial — rather than discretionary — review process might affect opportunities for community members to weigh in on development proposals. The need for further review of the amendment's provisions was also identified as a significant issue before the Commission could move forward.

Given these outstanding concerns, the item was postponed rather than acted upon, allowing additional time to address the questions raised about public participation and the specifics of the proposed objective standards.