Soccer wars heat up over proposed Newtown complex. Both sides need to give.
The brewing fight over proposed soccer fields for Lexington’s new professional soccer franchise off Newtown Pike poses a number of conundrums. On the lighter side, it could make for some potentially awkward social situations — Bill Shively, the owner of the new club is a board member of the Fayette Alliance, which strongly opposes the idea, and lives on his humongous horse farm, Dixiana, across the street from Fayette Alliance board member Greg Goodman over at his humongous horse farm, Mount Brilliant.
But on a more serious level, there are good arguments on both sides of our always fraught and complex land use issues, and this could be model for how we try to solve them.
On the one hand, we have Shively and crew trying to build — without any public financing, which is a huge plus — a soccer stadium for the professional team close by to 12 new soccer fields and parking for the 1,500 kids in youth teams. The practice fields could also serve as a youth sports complex long called for in Lexington’s comprehensive plan that could host tournaments for teams from out of state. Currently most of those tournaments head to Elizabethtown, Bowling Green and Ohio along with plenty of dollars from Lexington parents. (Full disclosure: One of my children is signed up to play on an LSC team.)
The stadium would be near the Cracker Barrel in the small “economic development” zone just off I-75, but needs special permission from the Planning Commission because stadiums are not allowed in ED zones.
The fields, however, would be located just north of there on almost 150 acres in the Agricultural Rural zone. Recreational facilities are technically allowed with a conditional use permit, but the club is also asking for lights, concessions and a giant 750-space parking lot. The Board of Adjustment must approve the conditional use for the fields; the Planning Commission on whether the fields can have lights and concessions.
Groups like the Fayette Alliance, which advocates for farmland preservation and better urban infill, fears the lights, parking and noise will stress nearby horses and take up too much productive agricultural farmland. Neighbors are also worried about the increase in traffic coming on and off the interstate.
“We’ve been put in a position where we can’t not oppose this,” said the Alliance’s executive director Brittany Roethemeier. “We would love to support soccer but we really believe that this particular location and the intensity of this use merits disapproval for a conditional use permit in the AR zone.”
Although the stadium and the fields have two different sets of approval processes — one through the Planning Commission and one through the Board of Adjustment — Roethemeier said it’s important to look at the fields and the stadium together because the fields’ parking will end up with overflow from the stadium during games.
“It really grows from ‘this is a recreational facility’ to ‘this is intensive use in our most protected zone,’” she said. “It begins to undermine the integrity of the AR zone, and we need to ask: what kind of use are we going to allow in our most protected zones?”
Compromise and discussion
Lexington Sporting Club president Vince Gabbert argues the site would provide a low-intensity use of land that would finally fulfill Lexington’s hopes for a tournament level complex. “This is the one thing the city has always asked for and we’re trying to provide it. In my learning curve, one thing we do not have enough of in this community is fields to support the number of kids who want to play.”
He also thinks the fields would be a good buffer between the commercial area and agriculture. In an ideal world, the boundary from urban to rural is not so stark as a McDonald’s abutting a pasture filled with mares and foals; soccer fields would be a more gentle transition.
These issues need to be hashed out more; one complaint from neighbors and opponents is that the plan was sprung on them with little preparation after LSC had made a big splash about its plans to build a stadium downtown.
So what are the compromises that either side would be willing to make? Gabbert said they’ve already agreed to a no fireworks rule at the stadium. But no one has talked to him about, for example, making parking that is permeable, so there’s less blacktop and less runoff. Could the lighting be confined to just a few fields rather than all 12? What about using night sky friendly lighting? What about really good barriers between soccer fields and pastures?
Both sides have to give. There is a growing feeling that Lexington’s attitude toward keeping growth boundaries fixed in amber forever needs a smarter and more focused approach for meeting our future needs. No one likes change, and all you have to do is follow the planning commission meetings to see how someone always opposes every proposed change. NIMBBYism is deep in our souls, it seems, but you just can’t be against everything all the time.
Both sides profess themselves willing to keep talking. As Roethemeier said, “Transparency and communication will put us in a place where resulting projects are the best for our community.“
It’s not clear that Lexington can support a professional soccer team, although it’s plenty clear it can support youth leagues. But the whole project is worth a lot more public discussion and a lot more compromise before it’s rejected out of hand.
The Urban County Board of Adjustment will decide whether to grant a conditional use permit for the youth sports fields at 2501 Russell Cave Road at a 1:30 p.m. meeting on June 28. The Planning Commission will meet on July 28 to vote on text amendments for the stadium and whether the soccer fields can have lights and concessions.
This story was originally published June 24, 2022 at 9:48 AM.
