Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning 115 Southview topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Nicholasville commissioners deny rezoning request for 115 Southview Drive after safety concerns

City Commission of the City of Nicholasville · August 12, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The City Commission moved to deny Ordinance 166-2024, a rezoning request to convert a 0.84-acre multifamily parcel at 115 Southview Drive to townhouse zoning, citing traffic and driveway safety near the Third Street/Edgewood intersection. Planning staff said the Planning Commission had recommended approval 6–0.

The City Commission voted to deny Ordinance 166-2024, a first-reading rezoning that would have changed approximately 0.84 acres at 115 Southview Drive from R-3 (multifamily) to R-1T (townhouse) after commissioners expressed persistent safety and parking concerns.

Tim, a planning staff member who presented the item, told the commission the Planning Commission had recommended approval by a 6–0 vote and described the applicant's proposed townhouse plan and prior compromises on building façades. "The Planning Commission voted unanimously that night to approve ... 6 to 0," Tim said. He also cautioned that the property's existing R-3 zoning could allow multifamily expansion if an applicant met all technical requirements.

Multiple commissioners said their primary issues were vehicular access and on-street spillover parking along South Third Street near the busy intersection with Edgewood Drive. One commissioner described the intersection as "a very busy intersection" and said they were concerned about residents and visitors backing out of short, front-loaded driveways so close to the corner. Commissioners questioned whether rear-loaded parking could be required under an R-1T standard and whether a single shared parking entrance behind units would be feasible.

Tim responded by summarizing driveway and lot standards that apply under current ordinances, noting that R-1T rules generally require rear-loaded access and that the proposed units would have double driveways and minimum lot widths. He also said the city had discussed requiring brick or other façade improvements in exchange for parking adjustments at the Planning Commission.

After discussion a commissioner moved to deny the rezoning "as presented" and asked the applicant to return with a revised plan that addressed rear-loading and circulation. The motion was seconded and carried by roll call. The motion therefore halted approval of the R-1T rezoning in its current form; staff and commissioners indicated they would welcome a redesigned proposal that addressed driveway access and safety concerns.

What happens next: the denial applies to the presented ordinance. Staff indicated the applicant could return with a revised development plan or pursue options available under the site's existing R-3 zoning if the applicant submits a conforming development plan.