Planning Commission Subdivision Items

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Urban County Planning Commission convened on April 9, 2026, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers of the Urban County Government Building, located at 200 East Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky, with Mr. Chairman presiding. The meeting addressed 3 agenda items spanning Final Subdivision Plans, Preliminary Development Plans, and Waivers, all of which were approved. Over the course of the meeting, the Commission conducted 12 motions and votes and heard 7 public comments from attendees.

Attendance

The following 13 members were present at the April 9, 2026 Commission meeting:

• Frank Penn
• Mike Owens
• Judy Worth
• Vaughan Adkins
• David Filiatreau
• Traci Wade
• Daniel Crum
• Chris Chaney
• Cheryl Gallt
• Paula Owens
• Embry Beatty
• Tracy Jones
• Brittany Smith

No members were recorded as absent or late.

Votes and Decisions

All votes at the April 9, 2026 Commission meeting passed unanimously unless otherwise noted. Two items were postponed rather than decided.

• Performance Bonds and Letters of Credit — Moved by Mr. Wilson, seconded by Ms. Wirth. Approved unanimously. 0:01

• PLN-CELL-26-00001 — Briar Hill South Wireless Communication Facility — A request for a one-month continuance was moved by Mr. Owens, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan Davis. Granted unanimously; the item is postponed. 0:03

• PLN-FRP-26-00008 — Thomas & Ann Asbury Property Final Record Plat — Moved by Mr. Penn, seconded by Ms. Wirth. Approved unanimously, subject to the ten conditions approved by the subdivision committee. 0:12

• PLN-WAV-26-00009 — Lot Frontage Waiver, Thomas & Ann Asbury Property — Moved by Mr. Penn, seconded by Ms. Wirth. Approved unanimously with two conditions. 0:13

• PLN-MJSUB-26-00002 — Patchen Wilkes Unit 3 Preliminary Subdivision Plan — Moved by Commissioner Wirth, seconded by Mr. Penn. Approved unanimously with 11 staff-requested conditions. 0:29

• PLN-WAV-26-00007 — Alternate Street Cross-Sections Waiver, Patchen Wilkes Unit 3 — Moved by Commissioner Wirth, seconded by Mr. Wilson. Approved unanimously. 0:33

• PLN-MJDP-26-00009 — Fister Property Preliminary Development Plan — Moved by Mr. Wilson, seconded by Commissioner Barksdale. Approved unanimously with six staff-provided conditions. 0:47

• PLN-MJDP-26-00010 — Bryant Property Preliminary Development Plan — Moved by Mr. Wilson, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan Davis. Continuance granted unanimously to allow assessment of grave sites and graveyard issues. 1:43

• PLN-MJDP-26-00019 — The Maxwell Development Plan — Moved by Commissioner Wirth, seconded by Mr. Wilson. Approved by roll call vote. 2:30

• PLN-WAV-26-00005 — Sidewalk Requirements Waiver, The Maxwell — Moved by Commissioner Wirth, seconded by Mr. Wilson. Approved by roll call vote; the applicant demonstrated hardship. 2:32

• PLN-WAV-26-00006 — Open Space Reduction Waiver, Beaumont Farm Unit 10 Lot 10 — Moved by Mr. McClure, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan Davis. Approved unanimously for reasons given by staff. 2:39

• PLN-WAV-26-00008 — Substantial Completion Requirements Waiver, Coventry, Belmont Farm — Moved by Mr. Penn, seconded by Commissioner Wirth. Approved unanimously for reasons provided by staff. 2:48

Public Comment

Seven residents addressed the Commission during the public comment period, with the majority expressing opposition to the proposed development.

• Greg Lubeck 1:00:21 raised concerns about traffic impacts on Pleasant Ridge Drive, characterizing current conditions as chaotic and suggesting the traffic study does not fully reflect the realities on the ground.

• Eddie Gribbons 1:04:10 claimed ownership of a portion of the property under consideration, citing the presence of a swimming pool and a slave graveyard on the land. Gribbons stated an intent to pursue legal action related to the matter.

• Haley Lee 1:07:26 argued that the proposed development is incompatible with the existing neighborhood, pointing to traffic, zoning, and environmental considerations as key concerns.

• Sage Kitchen 1:10:07 contended that the development's density is too high and does not align with the character of the surrounding neighborhood.

• Denise Inlow 1:11:50 opposed the development on the grounds of traffic and safety, calling for growth that is thoughtful and enhances rather than detracts from the environment.

• Melanie Buttery 1:15:02 focused on the impact to Bryant Road specifically, describing it as narrow and inadequate to handle the traffic volume that the proposed development would generate.

• Beth Hollis 1:17:46 expressed concern about the development's effect on quality of life in the area, citing traffic congestion and a potential increase in crime.

Across the comments, traffic impact was the most consistently raised issue, with speakers referencing conditions on both Pleasant Ridge Drive and Bryant Road. Additional themes included neighborhood compatibility, development density, environmental considerations, and public safety. Gribbons' comments regarding property ownership and a slave graveyard on the site were the most distinctive, with a stated legal challenge pending.

Contested Items

Two items on the April 9, 2026 Commission agenda drew notable disagreement from community members and commissioners alike.

Bryant Property Development

A proposed development on Bryant Road faced pushback from several community members who raised concerns spanning multiple issues, including traffic impacts, zoning questions, and potential complications related to a graveyard on or near the property. The record does not indicate a final vote outcome for this item, but the opposition from residents represented a clear point of contention during the meeting.

The Maxwell Development Plan

The Planning Commission was divided over the approval of a development plan for a project identified as The Maxwell. The disagreement centered specifically on two elements: the addition of a pergola to the project and requirements related to sidewalks. The split vote indicates that commissioners did not reach a unanimous decision, though the record does not specify the final tally or outcome of the vote.

Final Subdivision Plans

4:06

The Commission took up discussion of final subdivision plans covering two properties: the Thomas & Ann Asbury property and Patchen Wilkes Unit 3. Key speakers on this item were Cheryl Gallt and Gary Rowland.

The discussion centered on requests for waivers related to:

• Lot frontage requirements
• Street cross-sections

Both waiver requests were considered as part of the final subdivision review process for the properties in question.

Following discussion, the Commission approved the final subdivision plans.

Preliminary Development Plans

34:25

The Commission took up Agenda Item 2, a discussion of preliminary development plans covering two properties: the Fister property and the Bryant property.

Key speakers on this item included Chris Chaney and Jihad Hallani, who participated in the discussion before the Commission.

The discussion centered on several concerns raised in connection with the proposed developments:

• Traffic impacts associated with the planned development activity on the properties
• Zoning considerations relevant to how the properties could be developed
• Graveyard issues identified in connection with one or both of the properties under review

Following the discussion of these concerns, the Commission approved the preliminary development plans.

*Note: Additional detail on the specific proposals presented, the nature of the zoning questions, the traffic analysis, and the particulars of the graveyard issue were addressed during the meeting and can be reviewed in full beginning at timestamp 34:25 of the meeting recording.*

Waivers

2:33:34

The Commission took up Agenda Item 3, a discussion of waivers related to Beaumont Farm and Coventry, Belmont Farm, covering open space and substantial completion requirements.

Key speakers on this item were Cheryl Gallt and Matt Carter.

The Commission considered waiver requests connected to the two farm properties, with the discussion centering on open space requirements and substantial completion standards applicable to those sites. The specifics of what was presented and any concerns raised during deliberation were addressed by Gallt and Carter in their remarks to the Commission.

The Commission ultimately approved the waivers.

---

*Note: Additional detail on the arguments made, conditions attached, or specific figures discussed is not available in the source data for this item.*