[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6589794,"mediaKeyId","5474930-eb2db4a6877a7a6cb455f150923d9094","parentId",5474930,"title","Planning commission plans affordable‑housing roundtable for September, aims to bring finance and developer experts","audioSeconds",609,"startMs",7064000,"endMs",7673000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5474930-eb2db4a6877a7a6cb455f150923d9094&start=7064&end=7673","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5474930-eb2db4a6877a7a6cb455f150923d9094/thumbnail_7064000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6589794/Lexington-City/Fayette-County/Kentucky/Planning-commission-plans-affordablehousing-roundtable-for-September-aims-to-bring-finance-and-developer-experts","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6589794-4a4640288e53c790cebffe8496599981/orig.mp4?Expires=1771002082&Signature=aff7PU7qvaOz0AZIM5xbM10uHePVAeaZ1NdluZRJTKQ3oHgHHtCoxsjgpBEiVdd0qHSYd5vKpiL-FczPwNFvSjjEINUO~QFbGfW~0hC5ro0c1j9D8BGp0UpbR~PJ7r7q~1IuBrbqNlrLAWF9Kabq39H0lAvODzzmmlayI0dxgLzKi8XBQvhN399yhkbxmeIBz05UFRGevbsBMKwJECHsmS~vFeadtfubOrfyxNbv0SgxUJrSNC5Yu0orj9K-6N8tF5gGmn2UPDGMCpLKJuX9OLhZnvS86ByVYAFgIGuqarpqhTZSyVHsNsxp~HnvihZZ~k36phoVwtapTZxnhH1iSQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Lexington","date","2025-07-24T00:00:00Z","article","Commissioners discussed and agreed to aim for a September work session to explore affordable‑housing strategies, financing and partnerships.

Planning staff said they would arrange a roundtable to bring together housing developers, housing authority representatives, bankers and other stakeholders. Suggested participants included Austin Sims, Todd Johnson, representatives from AU Associates and Winterwood (developers that use low‑income housing tax credits), and bankers to discuss long‑term financing options. Commissioners also noted the council’s long‑running housing trust contributions (a referenced 1% of the budget) as a funding source to scale production.

Why it matters: commissioners indicated a desire to move from isolated projects to a coordinated, larger‑scale approach that combines public resources, tax‑credit developers and private financing; the work session aims to surface models and constraints and to separate discussion of product types (rental vs. homeownership) and financing steps.

Key details
- Staff proposed targeting a September 18 work session and to invite developers, housing authority staff, low‑income housing tax credit practitioners, and lenders; staff will organize the meeting and follow up on invitations.
- Commissioners noted the difference between rental affordable housing (often supported by LIHTC and public subsidies) and homeownership strategies; one commissioner flagged senior housing specifically as a growing need.
- Commission staff said additional related items and updates will be covered at an upcoming July 31 fifth‑Thursday work session (outreach and strategic planning updates, Blue Sky small area plan updates).

Ending
Staff will schedule and circulate invitations and an agenda for the September roundtable; commissioners asked that participants be able to discuss both practical delivery models (who builds and finances projects) and policy tools (trust funds, bonding, tax credits) to scale affordable housing locally.
","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Lexington - Planning Commission Zoning Items","oneSentenceSummary","Commissioners discussed assembling a work session on affordable housing, targeting Sept. 18, to hear developers, housing authorities and financing experts about scaling production and funding; staff said committees and a roundtable will be arranged for fall.","taxTitle","Lexington City, Fayette County, Kentucky","taxId",5707,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6589800,"Planning commission initiates zoning text amendment to implement state rules for 'qualified manufactured homes'",353,6732000,7085000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5474930-eb2db4a6877a7a6cb455f150923d9094&start=6732&end=7085","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5474930-eb2db4a6877a7a6cb455f150923d9094/thumbnail_6732000.jpg","/articles/6589800/Lexington-City/Fayette-County/Kentucky/Planning-commission-initiates-zoning-text-amendment-to-implement-state-rules-for-qualified-manufactured-homes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6589800-38a83f45792f5bd27409004c53005d88/orig.mp4?Expires=1771002082&Signature=Zo5kFLKBKcGbpooSWxEkiO5q6Ly5z~8a6AXV1T4iSS3cvZg5fDnwC0QM9Twz5PSChzYuJLAUvAfGmLFKAxHjxOoZIzBDkE~c4PDZL0wpDdqCb1nBIQwyd~4RsEPVlgojgtIMzpzZwZhX7sQQS9QQPMKTtj08JvGs1nwrW5ifhAkgmPaLYZzmAjll9OQ-oE-cJ9UDowsp3RS6RxAi-6zm-Pcbd3TJPf0M9YcLX8Ik6~NmOKrbOlHJDydxAcPsaF1eBG79G~HjWcDErp8SBbb~Aun1BvSZshY3EsrS~xDkm81py4YnVBKzraqu4B7MucdLWXH9bLuMfk~c6~jDHvjLrg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lexington‑Fayette Urban County Planning Commission unanimously initiated a zoning ordinance text amendment July 24 to bring local rules into compliance with a new state requirement for “qualified manufactured homes.”

Planning staffer Daniel Crone described the proposal as an implementation step required by state law: if a manufactured home meets certain criteria, it must be treated the same as a single‑family residence in applicable zones. Crone summarized the staff’s draft and the public review schedule.

Why it matters: the change will affect how new, modern manufactured homes (built to federal Manufactured Home construction standards and meeting state criteria) are sited and permitted in residential zones; local overlays such as historic districts would still apply to those structures.

Key points from staff
- Daniel Crone said a qualifying manufactured home must generally be: constructed within the last five years, have transport apparatus removed and be affixed to a permanent foundation, be at least 20 feet wide, and be at least 900 square feet (with limited exceptions for very small lots). He noted units that do not meet these criteria remain regulable under existing local rules.
- Timeline in staff materials: initiation was approved; committees will review drafted text in early September, a planning commission zoning hearing is tentatively scheduled for Sept. 25, and the Urban County Council would act later. Local code changes must be in place by July 1, 2026 to meet the state deadline.

Commission action
Commissioner Penn moved to initiate the zoning ordinance text amendment; Commissioner Barksdale seconded. The motion carried unanimously.

Clarifying details
- Deadline to enact local implementing language: July 1, 2026.
- Basic qualifying criteria cited by staff: ≤5 years old, permanently affixed foundation, wheels removed, ≥20 ft width, >900 sq ft (exceptions possible for very small lots).

Ending
Staff will circulate draft language for committee review and public comment this summer and fall. The initiation vote sends the item forward for formal drafting and public hearings ahead of the state compliance deadline.
","The commission voted unanimously July 24 to initiate a zoning ordinance text amendment to implement requirements from a new state law (House Bill 160) that treats qualifying manufactured homes like site‑built single‑family houses; staff outlined minimum qualifying criteria and a timeline for review.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6589804,"Planning commission upholds BOAR approval for 115 Penmoken Park addition, denies neighbor appeal 6-1",5741,982000,6723000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5474930-eb2db4a6877a7a6cb455f150923d9094&start=982&end=6723","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5474930-eb2db4a6877a7a6cb455f150923d9094/thumbnail_982000.jpg","/articles/6589804/Lexington-City/Fayette-County/Kentucky/Planning-commission-upholds-BOAR-approval-for-115-Penmoken-Park-addition-denies-neighbor-appeal-6-1","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6589804-c7c85873d272b1d169f77f72cda4552f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771002082&Signature=aCGHwTrD-Y4UNXsG78J3zW5g7BGuflaEVn5e~LtpMBEXegxos0CanlKNxDqQ-NkfhX64cREIA~v~-CJ3IBP0jxICEGN1X95aafZ49TSyuAL19N-HkWk~AXBrYf5AJicyeIcZroSocfHvTWhkD3TkrIEDk~rW7g8Je8KPYiVwhrvDxUWUaGLRxjLK6YgbzEKQ38tn-iIDLmUHIegqKQUtRQGq8NZF6i8Mf~gxmrG4mJ3hOucMwbViIdLGu7BmMw6I92knHsXqmJiu0x0NT6KZxVSBxCY3Yhk7RFfS-WfpAC7vnS41MjAShHS~NOBg9Aqg-lyTIsK9znz7EXqmkuWYBg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lexington‑Fayette Urban County Planning Commission denied a neighbor’s appeal of a Board of Architectural Review certificate of appropriateness for a rear addition at 115 Penmoken Park, upholding the BOAR decision by a 6‑1 vote July 24.

Planning staffer Daniel Crone told the commission the matter before them was “an appeal to the decision of the B.O.A.R. regarding the property at 115 Penmoken Park,” and that the commission’s role was to review whether the BOAR erred in applying the local historic preservation guidelines. The addition at issue was built without permits around the winter holidays and later submitted to BOAR; BOAR approved the modified design at its April hearing by a 3‑1 vote.

Why it matters: the property sits inside the Pensacola Park H1 historic overlay; the case tested how strictly the commission and BOAR must enforce guideline language that uses “should” (advisory) rather than “shall” (mandatory). Preservation staff argued the addition still failed key guidance (notably a 12‑inch recommended step‑back and roofline separation) but BOAR members found conditions and design changes sufficient to differentiate old from new.

Most important facts
- The addition was constructed without building permits; historic‑overlay rules require a certificate of appropriateness (COA) for exterior changes. Planning staff said enforcement and building‑permit questions would be handled separately at the building permit stage.
- Planning staff recommended the commission disallow the appeal and uphold BOAR’s COA. Historic preservation staff’s position to the BOAR had been to recommend denial, though they supplied findings for approval should the BOAR choose to approve.
- BOAR approved the COA at its April hearing, 3‑1. The commission received an appeal filed May 14 from the adjoining property owner.
- Conditions BOAR attached and shown in the record included changing siding orientation/materials (to a cementitious vertical siding), replacing proposed vinyl windows with wood‑compliant windows, a reduced roof pitch/break to delineate addition from original house, pilasters at corners and insertion of bay windows to break the long wall face, and a rear stoop/exit.

Key testimony
- Bruce Simpson, attorney representing the adjoining owner (identified in the record as Libby Rockway), urged reversal. Simpson summarized record facts and argued BOAR lacked evidence to find the revised design met guidelines: “there was no evidence for that board to make a decision that it comported with the guidelines,” and he warned against creating a precedent that would reward construction done without permits. He also described the addition as a near‑continuous 44‑foot wall visible from the neighbor’s yard.
- Historic preservation staff testified in detail about guideline 2.4.2 (additions), emphasizing the guideline language that exterior walls “should be stepped in a minimum of 12 inches” and that rooflines should be stepped down so the original roof remains evident. Staff recommended denial to the BOAR but provided conditions that could have supported approval.
- Diane Lowe, owner of 115 Penmoken Park and the property’s applicant, addressed the commission and said she did not realize the house was in a historic district when she bought it and apologized that her contractor did not obtain permits. She said she was not planning to rent the house to students and said she would work with neighbors on window choices.

Commission deliberations and ruling
Commissioners debated whether BOAR properly exercised its discretion under guidelines that use “should.” Some commissioners emphasized the sympathetic facts and the proposed design changes, and others raised concern about precedent and fairness when applicants previously complied with guidelines at considerable expense. After discussion, Commissioner Nicholl moved to deny the third‑party appeal and uphold BOAR’s COA; Commissioner Barksdale seconded. The motion passed 6‑1 (tally: yes 6, no 1).

Clarifying details from the record
- Addition dimensions cited by staff: approximately 24 feet deep by 11 feet wide; staff described the combined existing house plus addition as an overall length of about 60 feet in context with neighboring properties.
- Construction without permits occurred around Christmas; complaints and the BOAR/permit review process unfolded from January through April.
- BOAR vote on April 16 to approve the COA: 3‑1 (noted in staff materials and corrected from an earlier misidentified 4‑0 in initial draft).
- Appeal received by planning staff on May 14.

Ending
The commission’s decision upholds BOAR’s conditional approval, but planning and building permit requirements remain for the applicant to obtain before finalizing construction. The record shows the staff and BOAR reached different recommendations at points in the process; the commission’s role was to determine whether BOAR’s decision was supportable under the guidelines and the evidence presented.
","The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Planning Commission on July 24 denied a third‑party appeal of a Board of Architectural Review (BOAR) certificate of appropriateness for a rear addition at 115 Penmoken Park, upholding the BOAR decision by a 6-1 vote after extended testimony and debate about design guidelines and the lack of permits.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission plans affordable‑housing roundtable for September, aims to bring finance and developer experts

Planning commission initiates zoning text amendment to implement state rules for 'qualified manufactured homes'

Planning commission upholds BOAR approval for 115 Penmoken Park addition, denies neighbor appeal 6-1