DMP250505

Lexington Downtown Master Plan Public Meeting

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

6:00 p.m.

Third Floor Community Room, Phoenix Building

101 East Vine Street

Lexington, KY 40507

 

Attendees

 

Steering Committee Members:   Tracee de Hahn, Phil Holoubek, Bill Johnston, Tim Kelly, Amy Lett, David Lord, Grant Phelps, Becky Reinhold, Dan Rowland, Tom Sheeran, Mac Stone, Randall Vaughn, Dr. Retia Scott Walker, and  Bob Wiseman

 

Consultants: Tom Creasey, Kevin Peterson, Sara Lewis, and Dhiru Thadani,

 

Lexington Downtown Development Authority Staff:  Harold Tate and Penny Ebel

 

Other Attendees:    Christel Blackburn, Sheri Capes,  Amy Clark, Duane Culp, Tim Douglas, Ged Dunn,  Dave Elbon, Jon England, Carol Fening,  Jo Gawthrop, Jim Griggs,  Mark Ishmael, Henry Jackson, Tom Johnson, Michael Karpf, Ellen Karpf, Chris King, Mike Kovash,  Keith Lovan, Steven Mazurka, Bernard McCarthy, Jim McKeighen,  Gary Means,  Win Meeker, Beverly Miller,  Andrew Moore, Danny Noland, Diane Owens, Van Meter Pettit,  Andre Regard, Joey Rose, and Harika Suklun

 

 

Meeting Summary

 

I.                     Welcome

Meeting brought to order (Chairman Tim Kelly)

 

II.                   Review of April 13, 2005 minutes (Chairman Tim Kelly)

Motion for acceptance.  Unanimous approval of minutes.

 

III.                 Downtown Traffic Analysis Update (Tom Creasey)

                        Discussion, Question & Answer: 

1.        How many variables are going to be studied?  Still to determine combinations and staging.

2.        How does this effect Newtown Pike?  Will be added to this model.

3.        Trying to improve LOS or “sabotaging” traffic relief?  Attempting to make downtown a better place (eg. one way traffic on Limestone too fast)

4.        Two-way increases conflicts, seems more dangerous.  Many factors will be considered.

5.        Will scenarios include Rupp Arena events?  No, only those predictable daily events.

6.        Estimates are made as to departure and destination points.  State Attorney General disallowed surveys

7.        Transit and pedestrians are included but bicycles will be a qualitative issue rather than quantitative.

8.        What about development outside of downtown?  Will be thrown in if known in 2 county regions.

9.        Simulation scenarios will be done with Master Plan information over the summer, but still to be defined how many variations.

 

IV.                 Consultant Presentation (Dhiru Thadani)

1.        Proposed land use change

2.        Proposed land use guidelines

3.        One-way transforms to two-way streets

4.        Increase residential development

5.        Create Parking Authority

6.        Density through design

7.        Celebrate urban entrances

8.        Invest in a pedestrian network, core in relationship to pedestrian and vehicular network

9.        Integrate Rupp Arena into Urban fabric

10.     Vine Street redevelopment

11.     Amphitheatre

12.     Proposed Community Center/Museum site

13.     Define Thoroughbred Park with buildings

14.     New green space at Main, Vine, Elm Tree Lane & Rose

15.     Incorporate town branch trail into downtown

16.     Connect downtown to surrounding region

17.     Promote infill development in downtown core

Discussion, Questions & Answers

A.      Shrinking Rose and Vine Streets?  Streets are too wide, conflict points are good for the                               pedestrian—slows traffic and makes drivers pay more attention.  Vine Street is currently 140ft from building to building.

B.       Burying power lines?  Love to and maybe can be handled through impact fees to developers.

C.       Financial modeling as to how it would happen?  No, Core is also zoned H-1 and planning commission trumps overlay and B.O.A.R. – backwards?  Yes, still trying to determine how it will be implemented only land use will change.

D.      Bicycles in designated bike lanes?  Not necessarily, only in cross town connection (EW)

E.       Town Branch Trail Project is “tickled to death” to be included in Master Plan – concern is median on Vine Street needs to be more usable.  Want park/greenway on one side of the street.  Crossing cross streets at corners better for bikes.

 

V.                   Process for implementation (Harold Tate and Chris King)

                No meeting in July.  Probably, August meeting for traffic presentation and September as final                            presentation.

                        Discussion, Questions & Answers

1.        Are slides available on website?  Yes, www.lexingtondda.com.  Conceptual ideas only good point, but Vine Street could also be park/stream on north side.

2.        H-1 zone conflicts?  Not being changed at all.  Residential mix?  Will come into play in next detail round, affordability is important and will continue after plan is completed.

3.        More residents needed downtown in order to spur growth and sees hesitancy to modify rules for parking so encourages highrise?  Example of South Hill (Bill Lear)  of 100du/acre good and want to see more of it.

4.        Richmond Rd. has no traffic control on cross streets.  Not the same as Vine Street.

5.        Schedule for implementation?  City is starting to prioritize and generate support/budgets for some items.

6.        Providence RI redevelopment was spurred by $3 billion in Federal investment and was begun in the 1970s.

7.        Implementation schedule needed to help get unified voice for appealing to Feds & State.

 

The meeting adjourned at        p.m. (Tim Kelly)