Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission delays decision on downtown first-floor residential text amendment
Summary
The Winchester-Clark County Planning & Zoning Commission discussed revisions to Article 6.12, including concerns that the change could create nonconforming first-floor residences; staff and magistrates asked for clearer grandfathering language and the item will be revised and reheard next month.
The Winchester-Clark County Planning & Zoning Commission on Monday reviewed a proposed text amendment to Article 6.12 of the county zoning ordinance that would change rules for first-floor residential units in the downtown B-2 district and directed staff and a subcommittee to revise the language for another public hearing.
Planning staff opened the discussion by reading comments submitted by the fiscal court, including concerns from Mr. Blanton that "this change would mean that the existing residences would be nonconforming," a point that prompted commissioners to consider explicit grandfathering language. Will Mayer, executive director of Park Coalition, urged greater public notice: "the text of the amendment be publicly available prior to planning commission meeting, so that you can have useful public comment," he said.
Commissioners and members of the fiscal court questioned whether the county’s existing variance and appeal procedures under Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) already address many of the fiscal court’s concerns. One magistrate who spoke during the hearing warned that strict variance criteria could make it difficult for property owners to obtain relief: "I hate to create any nonconformity," he said, adding that meeting variance requirements in KRS is often challenging for property owners.
Staff recommended, and several commissioners supported, drafting a short, clarifying sentence to explicitly state that existing nonconforming first-floor residential uses that meet the statutory grandfathering criteria would be allowed to continue. Commissioners debated whether the amendment should apply to the entire B-2 downtown district or be limited to Main Street storefronts and directed the subcommittee to draft revised language reflecting those scope options.
No formal amendment was adopted at the meeting. Instead, the commission asked staff to incorporate clarifying grandfathering language, consider the magistrates’ written comments, and return the revised text for a public hearing next month. The commission also discussed improving public access to proposed ordinance text ahead of hearings so neighbors and stakeholders can review changes in advance.
Next steps: staff and the subcommittee will prepare revised ordinance language and schedule a new public hearing; any final zoning change would proceed to the governing body if recommended by the commission.
