# Urban County Council Special Meeting - January 25, 2011 > Auto-transcribed civic record · January 25, 2011 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/1854 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/1854?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2011-01-25 - **Last revised**: July 17, 2026 - **Length**: 17,334 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Council met on January 25, 2011, at 5:00 p.m. in Lexington, Kentucky. Vice-Mayor Linda Gorton presided over the meeting. The Council considered one agenda item during the session: an ordinance adding a Neighborhood Design Character Overlay (ND-1) zone, which was approved. The Council took two votes and heard six public comments during the meeting. ## Attendance **Present:** - Linda Gorton - Council Member Farmer - Council Member Ford - Council Member Henson - Council Member Kay - Council Member Lane - Council Member Lawless - Council Member Beard - Council Member Blues - Council Member Crosbie - Council Member Ellinger **Absent:** - Council Member Martin - Council Member McChord - Council Member Myers - Council Member Stinnett **Late:** None recorded ## Votes and Decisions **Ordinance 0130-26: Adopt Findings of Fact and Revised ND-1 Design Standards for Montclair Neighborhood Overlay Zone** [timestamp: 2:00:16] Ms. Lawless moved to adopt the findings of fact and revised ND-1 Design Standards for the Montclair neighborhood overlay zone, seconded by Mr. Farmer. The motion passed by roll call vote with 9 ayes and 2 nays. Voting in favor: Farmer, Ford, Gorton, Henson, Kay, Lawless, Blues, Crosbie, and Ellinger Voting against: Lane and Beard The ordinance was amended to allow exterior siding replacement with the same material as 90% of the existing structure. **Ordinance 0130-26: Approve the Neighborhood Design Character Overlay (ND-1) Zone for Montclair and Surrounding Streets** [timestamp: 2:01:21] Ms. Lawless moved to approve the Neighborhood Design Character Overlay (ND-1) zone for Montclair and surrounding streets, seconded by Mr. Ellinger. The motion passed by roll call vote with 9 ayes and 2 nays. Voting in favor: Farmer, Ford, Gorton, Henson, Kay, Lawless, Blues, Crosbie, and Ellinger Voting against: Lane and Beard ## Public Comment Six speakers addressed the board during the public comment period, raising concerns about various aspects of the proposed ND-1 overlay district standards. **Driveway Width Restrictions** Richard Getty opposed the proposed 10-foot driveway limit, arguing it is unrealistic for high-value homes and would force residents to seek variances, particularly on busy Tates Creek Road. [timestamp: 0:07:52] **Neighborhood Preservation Process** Deborah Tatum explained the neighborhood's long-term effort to preserve its character, citing concerns over inappropriate development. She emphasized the importance of community input, noting that the neighborhood had conducted 24 meetings as part of the ND-1 process. [timestamp: 0:37:25] **Roof Line and Setback Standards** Victoria Graff objected to the proposed ND-1 standards, stating that her planned addition would violate the roof pitch, height, and rear yard setback rules. She requested that her previously approved plans be grandfathered under the new regulations. [timestamp: 1:01:52] **Vinyl Siding Restrictions** Jeff Fox expressed concern that the proposed ban on vinyl siding would prevent homeowners from matching existing homes, noting that many homes in the neighborhood are already vinyl-sided. [timestamp: 1:05:37] **Survey Validity and Nonconformity** Kathleen Yunker challenged the 70.6% support figure cited for the overlay, arguing it was based on a low response rate. She also raised concerns that many existing homes in the neighborhood would become nonconforming under the new rules. [timestamp: 1:38:14] **Overlay District Scope** Michael Hooper argued that the overlay is overly restrictive and that issues such as student traffic and parking should be addressed through other means, including speed bumps and zoning changes, rather than through building restrictions. [timestamp: 1:15:25] ## Contested Items **Amendment to Allow Vinyl Siding Replacement** Council members debated whether to amend the ND-1 standards to allow exterior siding replacement with the same material as 90% of the existing structure. The discussion revealed concerns over fairness, enforcement, and potential unintended consequences of the proposed amendment. The vote on this matter was split among council members, indicating significant disagreement about the appropriate approach to siding replacement standards. **Grandfathering of Existing Plans** A heated discussion arose regarding the grandfathering of existing approved plans. Opponents argued that approved plans should be grandfathered in under the new standards. However, staff and proponents of the amendment countered that construction must begin within a specified timeframe in order to qualify for grandfathering status. They also emphasized that variances remain available as an alternative pathway for property owners seeking relief from the new standards. ## An Ordinance adding a Neighborhood Design Character Overlay (ND-1) zone [timestamp: 00:01:34] The Council held a public hearing on a proposed Neighborhood Design Character Overlay (ND-1) zone affecting properties on Cooper, Montclair, Scoville, Kastle, Summit, Eldemere, and Tates Creek Roads. **Background and Recommendation** The Planning Commission recommended approval of the ND-1 overlay, citing alignment with the 2007 Comprehensive Plan and findings from a neighborhood design study. **Public Testimony** The hearing included testimony from multiple speakers: - Richard Getty - Deborah Tatum - Bill Sallee - Victoria Graff - Jeff Fox - Kathleen Yunker Residents expressed both support for and opposition to the proposed overlay. **Concerns Raised** Public testimony identified several specific concerns about the overlay requirements: - Driveway width restrictions - Siding restrictions - Enforcement of the proposed design standards **Outcome** The ordinance was approved. --- ## Decisions - **Ordinance 0130-26** — passed (9-2): Adopt findings of fact and revised ND-1 Design Standards for the Montclair neighborhood overlay zone - **Ordinance 0130-26** — passed (9-2): Approve the Neighborhood Design Character Overlay (ND-1) zone for Montclair and surrounding streets --- ## Full transcript So I'll be chairing the meeting and the first thing I will do is ask our clerk to call the roll and to give second reading to the ordinance. Mr. Farmer? Mr. Ford? Here. Ms. Gordon? Here. Ms. Henson? Here. Mr. Kaye. Here. Mr. Lane. Ms. Lawless. Here. Mr. Martin. I have a conflict with my family that lives on one of the streets in this area, and so because we have a quorum, I am going to abstain and leave. Thank you. Mr. McCord. Mr. Myers. Mr. Stennett. Mr. Beard. Present. Mr. Blues? Here. Ms. Crosby? And Mr. Ellinger? Here. Thank you. Thank you. Will you give second reading to the ordinance? Ordinance for second reading, an ordinance adding a neighborhood design character overlay ND1 zone for 53.7 plus or minus net, 67.5 plus or minus gross acres to preserve existing neighborhood character for properties located at 601 through 821 Cooper Drive, 1212 through 1251 Eldemere Road, 1203 through 1304 Castle Road, 600 through 818 Montclair Drive, 1213 through 1283 Scoville Road, 1200 through 1252 Summit Drive, and 1500 through 1600 Tates Creek Road, even addresses only, Urban County Planning Commission. Thank you. Now, it has been over a year since the Council had a zone change hearing. So I am going to read the rules, if it suits you, and then we have, I'll be swearing everybody in, and I might actually do that first, swear in those people who want to speak, and then we have a request to veer, by a citizen to veer off of the usual procedure because he has to leave. So the first thing I'll do is go ahead and open the hearing and swear in any witnesses. So if you intend to speak at the podium, you need to stand up, please. And this includes petitioner, opponents, planning staff, and if you'll raise your right hand. Do you swear that everything you say tonight is the truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Very good, you're sworn in. Now, I want to explain the rules and explain to everyone here, audience and council members alike, that the presiding officer, that would be me, has the power to make evidentiary decisions to exclude irrelevant or repetitious testimony. And council members have the right to tell me when they think something is repetitious or irrelevant. And then we can ask that you please not continue. The petitioner will submit a witness list. Does the petitioner have a list of witnesses? Yes. Yes. If you'll bring that to me, please. And the opponents, there should be an opponent list back there. If you don't mind to bring me all the lists, I think that would work. If you have printed materials that you wish to submit, thank you, they will be submitted to the council clerk over here to the left of the podium, and they'll be entered into evidence. and that goes for opponents or proponents or petitioners, anything that you would like to enter into evidence. Each witness who testifies will be subject to cross-examination at the conclusion of his or her testimony, and any witness called by the petitioner or opponent will stay in the public hearing so they may be questioned by the petitioner, opponent, or member of the council. All persons speaking shall be identified for the record, and what that means is you go to the podium, state your name and your address for the record. And then the order of things, I'll just go through the order as we get to them. and then at the end, the council will vote to either adopt the findings of fact and recommendations of the Planning Commission or adopt its own findings of fact, and then the council will take a second vote to either adopt or reject the ordinance. So, does that give everybody a good refresher? All right. Now, I would like to ask up front, several council members have discussed this, and I prefer not to make a formal vote on it, but to ask if those of you on either side would be willing to limit your comments to an hour each. Now, that's not an hour each person. That's an hour total. The rules say you can have a total of two hours for the petitioner or for the opponents. However, I'm wondering if an hour would suit. Do we have a consensus of shaking heads or? Okay. I see lots of yeses. Are there any no's? Yeah. Okay. Now, I need to ask, does the petitioner have an attorney or are you a group of individuals or a spokesperson? Okay. Okay. Now, just wait. Just hang on one second. Although I'm not an attorney, I'm not a president. Okay. Very good. Now, council members, normally the order of things would not allow individual opponents to speak until a little farther into the agenda. I've had a request from one individual who has a conflict and needs to leave and would like to know if he could speak for three minutes before he leaves. So you want to move to change the rules? Okay. Okay. So, Council Member Blues moved to change the rules and allow the gentleman to speak, and I heard a second from Council Member Henson. All those in favor, please say aye. Okay. Anyone opposed? Very good. I believe your name's Mr. Getty. If you will please step to the podium, give us your name and address, and then carry on. First of all, thank you for accommodating me with my conflict. My name's Richard A. Getty. I'm an attorney here in town, and I live at 1546 Tates Creek Road, and I'm one of the people in that general area who has greatly improved his property, both with an addition roughly 20 years ago and a garage and driveway. I just wanted to comment on one particular aspect of the proposal that I think is unrealistic and ought to be reconsidered. This limitation of driveways to 10 feet, we have million-dollar-plus houses in this area. people like me who have spent a lot of money and a lot of effort to improve the neighborhood and their properties. Ten feet is just not wide enough. You need to consider increasing that so you're not beset with a lot of variances. I built a brick-edged, brick-front driveway about ten years ago, which I assume is grandfathered in. It's in places 22 feet wide, including the turnaround. Tate's Creek Road is a very busy road. You need to have the ability to have the width. If you don't have a circular turnaround to be able to turn your car around or a visitor to turn their car around, it's a heavily traveled road and could be dangerous at times. And I think limiting new construction to 10 feet in width is just unrealistic, and I don't think it's intelligent in terms of when you consider the values of these homes in that area. That's basically all I have to say. I'll be happy to answer any questions. I know of a number of people like myself, Brent Rice across the street. I think his driveway is probably 15 feet wide. There are several others down the way that, you know, they're grandfathered in, but anyone that would in this area develop new construction, I think, would be hurt by this kind of limitation. Thank you very much. Now, I'll ask our legal attorney, Rochelle Boland, before Mr. Getty leaves, I'm presuming if there's a council member who has a question or someone who has a question, can you help us handle that since he did speak? I think probably first if the proponents of this, since they have a spokesperson, would want to direct any questions to Mr. Getty because he needs to be available for cross-examination, and then if the council has any questions for him, so that you can exhaust the ability for anyone to respond to what he has testified before he has to leave. Okay, and then after that we'll go to the planning division's presentation. All right. Did the proponent petitioner have a question for Mr. Getty? It's not really as much a question as it is a clarification. I think isn't the procedure that it can just be a... That's the only questions? Yeah, I mean, at this point, it's not really opening, closing, rebuttal, anything of that sort. If you have any questions to clarify his testimony, that would be appropriate at this point. Okay. Are you aware, sir, of the variance process? Would you mind stating your name and address for the record? I'm sorry, my name is Deborah Tatum. I'm the president of the Neighbors of Montclair. My address is 654 Montclair Drive. Yeah, I am aware of the variance process. You'll need to go to the microphone so it's all recorded, Mr. Getty. I am aware of the variance process, and I can tell you that about 10 years ago, when I built a very nice garage, I had to go through a variance process because the city limited the pitch and height of garages. And by the time I had my last bid in, I had not submitted my building plan, my architect. So I went through a literal nightmare that cost me about $15,000 to $20,000 to get a variance. And then after I went through that nightmare, along with six or eight other people, the planning commission and the city decided to change it back to the original version so that I could have a garage designed and built just like my house with the same pitch roof, the same dimensions, the same round copper dormers in the same proportion that the ones on the front of my house are. So, yes, I'm familiar with the variance. And what I'd say to you is don't force people to go through that kind of process because you're placing an unreasonable restriction given the type and nature and value of these houses on the size of a driveway. Now, Ms. Boland, now, according to what you said, if Councilmembers have a question of Mr. Getty, now would be the time. Okay. Is there any, Councilmember, if you do, please log in, who has a question of Mr. Getty? Council Member Crosby. My question may be for planning, but it's regarding what he stated about. Or I guess, is Tates Creek really the only street where this? Planning will give us all of that, I believe. You're wanting to know the mentions. Do you believe that Tates Creek is the only street that might be affected by this? Or do you believe that's a problem for the entire thing? I think it's a problem for the entire area. If you go back to Eldemere or over onto Montclair or on the other side of both sides of Tate's Creek, you have houses that are worth a lot of money. And I don't think you want to restrict the size of the driveway. I mean, maybe you need to reevaluate that aspect and see, you know, what increased width would be reasonable. I mean, mine, including the brick edge and the brick front, I think is like 20, 22 feet. Okay, thank you. Is there any other council member who has a question of Mr. Gabby? If not, thank you very much. You're welcome. And we'll release you. Now, we'll go on with our order of things. And first we'll have a presentation by the Division of Planning, specifically Bill Sallee. Welcome, Bill. Thank you, Vice Mayor, members of the Council. Good afternoon. It has been a long time since you've had a zoning public hearing, but there are two things I've remembered. One was to put a sign-up sheet in the back of the room for objectors and for those in favor of tonight's hearing. And the other is that at the start of your hearings, I have a number of things to enter into the record. The first is the legal notice put in the local newspaper advertising tonight's public hearing. The next is the final report and recommendation from the Urban County Planning Commission on this zone change. The Planning Commission is technically the applicant for this rezoning. The next two items are both affidavits, the first signed by myself regarding mailed notice that has been sent to property owners within this area that is proposed for rezoning and also to property owners within 400 feet of this area. Another affidavit testifies to the posting of zoning change signs in the neighborhood, also advertising tonight's public hearing. I need to enter into the record a copy of the 2007 comprehensive plan adopted by the Planning Commission, and likewise copies of the current zoning ordinance and land subdivision regulations that are in effect for the urban county government. I have two other items. One is an item that's been put at your place that is marked a planning staff exhibit that I'll address through my remarks. I have about a 15-minute presentation planned this evening. And then finally, the staff has received one letter from a resident of the area. It is from Mrs. Margaret Herbert, who has a return address of 631 West Cooper Drive. She is in opposition to this zone change. At this time, I'd like to circulate that to the council members. There are copies of the Planning Commission final report and our staff exhibit directly behind me on the counter, if anyone in the audience wishes to have a copy of those materials. As I mentioned, the Planning Commission is the applicant for this zone change, and I'd first like to orient you to the exact location of the zone changes before you this evening. It involves about 67 1⁄2 acres of property, many of the properties being on the west side of Tates Creek Road and east of the Kentucky Educational Television Studios and Offices on Cooper Drive. and also the University of Kentucky campus, which surrounds that. The most prominent structure in this area is Commonwealth Stadium, which is located about 800 feet from the edge of this neighborhood. The subject property involves all of the residences, all of the properties, on Scoville Road, Summit Drive, and some of the properties on Cooper, basically between Tates Creek and the UK campus, on Montclair between those same boundaries, on Eldemere almost as far north as Providence Road, and the same for Castle, Castle Road just stopping short of Providence Road. Cooper Drive, of course, is a collector street that goes east to west in this area, and most people are familiar with the signalized intersection there at Tates Creek Road. This zone change, as I mentioned, is over 60 acres, and it is to add a neighborhood design character overlay, an MD1 overlay zone, to all of these existing properties. These properties are currently zoned R1C, that is a single-family residential zone, as are most of the properties to the south, to the west, and to the north of this location. R1C is a zone that allows only single-family detached housing on lots at least 8,000 square feet in size. The lot dimensions must be a minimum of 60 feet in width. And the yard restrictions are 30-foot front yards, 10-foot rear yards, and 8-foot side yards in that zone. Residences are limited to 35 feet in height in the R1C zone. So the zone change before you this evening is to leave the R1 zoning in place and add the overlay zone. I would like to show you a few photos of some of the dwellings on the street, just to orient you to the neighborhood. The first is a view of some of the homes along Scoville Road. To orient you, this is the edge of the neighborhood and next to the Kentucky Educational Television property, their parking lot and studios and offices. This is Scoville looking. All of these photos are looking from the south. So this is heading toward Cooper Drive in that direction. Setbacks are generally 35 to 45 feet from the street along Scoville. We'll go through these rather quickly. This is a view of properties on Castle Road. On Castle, again, we have a similar setback of these residences from about 35 to 45 feet. You can tell from the photo most of the garages are detached along this street, although this particular property does have a front garage. The next is Summit Drive, single-family homes. The lot sizes are slightly larger along this street, And along some of the setbacks are also greater, 40 to 50 feet generally from the street. The next photo is a view of properties along Eldemere Road. Again, looking from the south, this is heading to Cooper, which I believe is right there in the northern part of the photo. Single-family homes, slightly larger sizes. And on Eldemere, 45 to 55 foot front yards generally. Next view is of Tates Creek Road. Properties along Tates Creek Road are only on the east side of the roadway. Properties west of Tates Creek are not part of this zone change. And I believe Mr. Getty's house is on the east side of the Tates Creek Road. These are the largest lots in the neighborhood and also have the largest setbacks. Montclair Road is the southernmost road in the subject area. It is perpendicular to Tates Creek Road. This is again a view of the south. These homes are one and a half, one story. A few two-story homes have fairly shallow yards on Montclair, 30 to 35 feet generally, and slightly smaller lots for some of the properties. Final photo is of Cooper Drive. Both properties on both sides of Cooper from Tates Creek to the University and KET properties are included in the zone change with one exception, the corner property on the northwest corner of Tates Creek and Cooper. This is a view of Cooper and the homes that are in the proposed zone change area. Finally, we have a summary map of the 2007 comprehensive plan. As we do with all zone changes, the staff makes a report and reviews the comprehensive plan for our public hearing with the Planning Commission. To orient you again to the area, we have Tates Creek Road. Cooper Drive is here. The UK and KET properties are here in the light blue color. And this neighborhood is between Tates Creek and the UK and KET properties. The map indicates that it's in an area recommended for low-density residential use. That's generally residential use of up to five units per acre. and the staff believes that the density in this area purports to the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan also has policy statements and goals and objectives, and the staff reviewed those as well in making our report to the Planning Commission on this zone change. We found that this zone change to an ND1 overlay zone does meet with one of the eight themes contained in the goals and objectives part of the comprehensive plan, which is the one part of the plan adopted by the Council. That theme is to preserve, protect, and maintain existing residential neighborhoods in a manner that ensures stability and the highest quality of life for all residents. In our report, we also found one specific goal of the comprehensive plan we felt was met with this proposed rezoning to an ND1. This application was initiated by the Planning Commission based on a request by the Neighborhood Association. And the Planning Commission did review the support for this overlay zone prior to initiating the change. The neighborhood supplied information to the Planning Commission both early on and through their hearing process, and we've included some of that information in the final report that was sent to you from the Commission. The staff also, when we have an overlay zone or a downzoning, take a look at what are called nonconformities, conformities, the extent that the regulations proposed will take properties that currently comply with the zoning ordinance and ones that would not comply with the proposed restrictions. We reviewed four proposals at some depth, and if you read the Planning Commission minutes, the ones that we looked at rather closely were front yard setbacks, rear yard setbacks, garage restrictions that are proposed with this ND1, and also driveway restrictions, which is the one issue you have already heard about. Generally, our findings were that between 85 and 90 percent of the homes in this area, which is 179, 180 properties, 85 to 90 percent will meet the proposed restrictions that are before you tonight with this ND1 overlay. That's not uncommon for nonconformities to be at that level. The staff generally has a concern if a much higher percentage of an area will become nonconforming, either with a down zoning or proposed zoning restrictions. That's why we make that an important part of our report. The Planning Commission heard not only from the planning staff, but also from neighborhood representatives and about a dozen residents of this neighborhood when they held a public hearing late in October of last year. The Planning Commission, at the conclusion of their hearing, voted 6 to 1 to recommend approval of this ND1 overlay zone to the Urban County Council. Their findings are on the first page of the final report, but the main finding was that this ND1 overlay zone is in agreement with the 2007 comprehensive plan, And the Planning Commission, like the planning staff in our report, had three reasons to support that finding. The first is that the goals and objectives of the plan state that neighborhood protection, overlay zoning provisions should be implemented for establishing stability and protection in existing and especially older neighborhoods. What I did not mention from our staff report is most of the homes in this area were built probably in the 1930s in the 1940s, perhaps a few in the early 1950s. Secondly, the ND1 overlay zone is in agreement with the comprehensive plan by providing specific standards that will maintain the existing character of the neighborhood independent of the underlying zoning. And thirdly, the Montclair neighborhood has completed a design character study of their area, developed preservation goals, and proposed appropriate neighborhood design standards in need of only slight modifications. The Planning Commission, in their recommendation, also included conditional zoning restrictions. That is the main way that ND1 overlay zoning is implemented. Those conditional zoning restrictions are to the use of these properties and include exterior siding material limitations, roof pitch and roof shape limitations, limitations on front yard fencing, window and door openings, front building features for the main entry door to residences, restrictions on garages and accessory structures, lot width, as you've already heard, along with driveway width, building heights, building setbacks, rear yard setbacks, and off-street parking in front yards. All of these restrictions are part of the Planning Commission's recommendation from their October public hearing. At this point, I would ordinarily close, but there's one more bit of information to share with you this evening, and that relates to the pink sheet that we've titled a Planning Staff Exhibit. In the past three months, the neighborhood has met with representatives of the Home Builders Association who were present at the Planning Commission hearing to discuss this proposed overlay zone, And they have reached agreement on some modifications to some of these conditional zoning restrictions. These modifications appear on the pink sheet and are identified either with an underline or a dash through to indicate the changes from those recommended by the Planning Commission. The staff wanted to introduce these to the Council this evening, recognizing the work that they have done in deliberation since late October. And also I would tell you that the staff has shared this with the zoning committee members of the planning commission. There was not a quorum at their last meeting, so they could not take action, but we did want to share this information with them. I believe that the Neighborhood Association will tell you this is the set of restrictions that they are now interested in. The Home Builders Association may or may not tell you the same thing this evening. That concludes my prepared remarks. I thank you very much. And as you know, if you remember from our last hearing, I will be here and available for your questions later in the evening. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Salley. Now, I'll ask Rochelle, is this the time for cross-examination of Mr. Salley? If you have any questions based on his presentation, yes, you can certainly ask him questions at this time. but as he said, he will be available throughout the hearing anytime that the Council has questions of the staff for clarification or whatever that is appropriate at any time. Okay, thank you. All right, thank you very much. Vice Mayor, there is technically no applicant since the Planning Commission is the applicant, so I think you can move right to citizen comments. Yes, we have. Oh, now, okay, can you clarify for me, Rochelle? I think the council does its speaking and questioning and debating at the end. So yes, I think generally they will, the council will ask for comments from the proponents of the zone change and then of the opponents. But in each case, you can, I think as a presiding officer, you can determine whether to allow questions of the witnesses at the time they testify or whether you want to wait until the end, and then allow questions from Council or the proponents. Well, we have a couple of Councilmembers who have signed in, and I would simply ask are your questions for Mr. Salee, in which case let's go ahead and do those now. So, Councilmember Blues. Mr. Salee, I just have a quick question for you. I went after the final agreement between the neighborhood association and the home builders that you just referenced, does this go back to all of the neighbors who originally voted, or is that with the neighborhood association itself? I think the latter. As far as I know, I know that the staff has not mailed this to property owners or anything like that. We have notified them, obviously, the public hearing this evening, and there have been copies all along at the entrance to the meeting where they are able to look at this. But as far as I know, this has not been mailed by the government to the property owners. Okay. Thank you, Bill. Yes, sir. Councilmember Farmer. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Ms. Selle, thank you, too. You're welcome. In getting familiar again here, in terms of enacting this, would it affect structures that have already been built? In other words, will this only affect changes from here on or anything in the past? That's correct. It would only affect structure changes from here forward. So the rules generally for grandfathering, whether it be a down zoning, an historic zoning, are that zoning changes cannot undo the path. Okay. And then specific to the planning staff exhibit, when it's time to couch a motion, how do you make a motion to contemplate these changes? I think they would be done the way the council has done it historically in adopting conditional zoning. For instance, the Council has, at times in the past, received recommendations from the Planning Commission and then decided to restrict maybe the zone change through the imposition of conditional zoning. It may be different from what the Planning Commission did, or perhaps the Commission didn't recommend the rezoning or recommended different restrictions. I think that the Council, of course, Ms. Bolin will correct me if she disagrees, but this would not be unlike that past practice. These can be adopted as conditional zoning restrictions. based on your public hearing this evening. Very good. Thank you, sir. Thanks, Mr. Vice Mayor. Council Member Lane. Good evening, Mr. Sally. I apologize. I was delayed coming into the meeting, so my question may be redundant. What my question is, is of the total people that live in the neighborhood, what percentage have signs saying they agree with this? I'm just trying to get an idea of how many people in the neighborhood want this. I'm going back to my memory from August. Before the Planning Commission initiated this, there was a postcard mailing to property owners in the area. I'm going to look really quickly at the minutes of that to see if we have that in the minutes. my recollection was that it was between 55 and 65 percent in support at the time the planning commission initiated. Again, what I may be able to do is during the course of your hearing, read those minutes and see if I can get you a better number than that. Okay. Okay. Translating that into the number of homes that were for it and against it, or say for it and didn't say one way or the other, what would be the numbers? Did you say it was about 150? 179 homes. I think there's one vacant property in the area. As I recall, it was maybe just under 100 that were in support in the 90s, I believe. Yeah, my only concern is that each person, when they buy their home, they have a bundle of rights of ownership in real estate. And when you put an overlay on, you basically modify those rights, maybe to the good or maybe to the bad. Sometimes there may be unintended consequences. So I'm always hesitant to support an overlay unless it's a really high percentage of people that have indicated that they were in favor of that. Thank you. Yes, sir. Council Member Blues. I just wanted to help out here a little bit. At the top of page 13, Bill, in the minutes, you have those numbers. There were 102 responding. Thank you. Not 100 in support. Very much appreciate that. 70.6% in support, 26.5% in opposition. Had the right number on the wrong bit of information. Thank you. I don't see any other council members who have questions, so thank you very much. Now, at this time, the opponents, do the opponents have an attorney or is it, I think we have some individuals who wish to speak. Okay. So we'll go straight to the individual opponents. And you will also be subject to cross-examination. And Mr. Getty already spoke. And next we have Victoria Graff. Ma'am, usually we take those in favor first. We usually take those in favor first. You can certainly vary the order. Okay. I'm just reading down my list, so let's take those in favor. I'm quite amenable to that Thank you very much Okay, Ms. Tatum Yes, my name is Deborah Tatum Again, I live at 654 Montclair Drive I'm the president of the Montclair Neighborhood Association And I'd like to give you a bit of an overview of why we're even doing this I don't know about you all, but when I was a kid I got to come and visit Lexington quite a bit My grandmother lived here on Elizabeth Street And we would come, and that was such a great neighborhood. It was full of families and professors, and it was a great university neighborhood. And I loved the area around Transylvania Avenue down on the corner of Rose and Rose, beautiful old homes. Unfortunately, the pressures that we're under, being next to a large institution like the University of Kentucky, make us have to take these kind of measures so that we prevent what's happened to some other neighborhoods from happening to ours. In other words, we're protecting our property and protecting our investment in our property by looking at an ND1 zoning. If you've been down the drive on Cooper Drive and go past KET, there's a new house on your right. It looks a lot like a dorm. That's what stimulated this process. Over four years ago, we started looking into ND1 zoning because someone came into our neighborhood and built a house that was not appropriate for our neighborhood. It didn't have any character of our neighborhood. It's still not lived in yet. And we saw this as the first step. We also actually had received requests for building townhomes in our neighborhood, which would, again, change the character of that neighborhood forever. I bought in our neighborhood because I loved the character of our neighborhood. I'm sure you'll find that most everyone here, whether they're for or against anyone's owning, bought for that reason. We are trying to protect our neighborhood from not just the university, but we have a major thoroughfare, Cooper, going through our neighborhood. And it does mix and present some challenges for us. We want to make sure that as we've gone through this process of over 24 meetings in three years on this ND1 zoning, we've contacted each and every one of our neighbors, whether they are a neighbor who lives on the property or an off-site owner. We have made every effort to embrace all sorts of different things that could have been put on our neighborhood. We've looked at all of them. We've checked the Chevy Chase neighborhood, for example, when they used ND1 zoning. We looked at the qualifications that they had. We saw what compared to our neighborhood and what didn't. And we're very lucky. Stan Harvey, who many of you should know from Urban Collage here in town, did a fabulous study for us, talking about the different makeups of our homes, the different sizes, the different characteristics in them. And I'm sorry that he could not be here today. He had to be out of town for a business meeting. Ms. Tatum, I'm so sorry. We have a three-minute limit when it's individuals. I was told by planning that I would have between 15 and 30 minutes as the lead speaker in this, but I will certainly abide by the Council's regulations. Thank you. Well, does the Council want to extend the time? I mean, it were. Okay. Did you want to say something? Well, I was just going to say I think part of the confusion here is that an ND1 overlay is kind of a different animal than usual zone changes. And although technically by law the applicant is the planning commission, it is driven by the neighborhood and the neighborhood leaders that get this process rolling and in essence do the studies and prepare the proposed conditional zoning. So it is a little bit different in that the neighborhood kind of is assuming the position of the petitioner, even though Chapter 100 doesn't give the citizens the right to initiate a zone change for property they don't own. So we kind of have taken the position that the neighborhood is acting as the petitioner and has more time to present. But, you know, it's up to this. You know, if she feels that her other witnesses will make the presentations, it's up to the council. what limitations that they want to set. When you were talking earlier about no more than an hour for each side, I think we were kind of thinking that there would be a representative of the neighborhood that would be taken up that time. Well, and I think that's, I mean, that's fine with me. I didn't realize you were the lead presenter, and so if that suits Council, that's, I think that's fine. Council Member Crosby has a comment or question. I was going to suggest before Ms. Bulling spoke that if the other witnesses don't provide the information that she has in her presentation, then perhaps we could allot more time at that point for her to come up and make the additional points. We may hear. And that way then, too, it's not repetitive from what she's saying, and it gives them all. Very good. Does that work for you? That works just fine. Okay. That's a great compromise. All right. Then we'll move on. And next we have, and I'm going to apologize ahead of time in case I massacre anyone's name, but I believe this is Dabney Parker. And then if, after you, if Jerry Price will be getting ready to queue up. Welcome. Thank you, Council. I'm Dabney Parker, and I live at 1225 Scoville Road. I've only been there 24 years. But I like the neighborhood. I'm not going to say a lot, but what I do want to say is I do appreciate being in that neighborhood. But I have been involved in this process for three of the four years, and we've had many opportunities to have neighborhood meetings, and we've made many adjustments in our plan based on the feedback from the neighborhood. So we felt like we were coming to you with a plan that was acceptable to our neighbors because we've given many, many opportunities for feedback, which I think is most important. Thank you. Thank you. Jerry Price, and then if Catherine Simon will queue up. My name is Jerry Price at 1262 Castle Road. And, you know, I've been involved in this process for several years along with the rest of my neighbors. And, you know, we've seen what can happen if development goes unchecked. And, you know, I've been in the community for about 15 years, and it has changed tremendously. You know, with the University of Kentucky building 20,000 more seats in the stadium or whatever, and the parking is just, you know, becomes a problem, and it's just one problem after another. Then you let somebody come in and build a dormitory in our neighborhood that's going to, you know, it's going to cause more traffic certainly, and it's just something that I think this ND1 is a very good thing, and I'd appreciate it if you all would consider that. Thank you. Thank you very much. Catherine Simon. Yes, good evening. I'm Catherine Simon. I live at 1233 Scoville Road. I've been there for 19 years. And I just want to add about the diversity of the neighborhood, because sometimes people think that this type of a zone change is attempting to make a cookie-cutter neighborhood or Williamsburg-like neighborhood. I've heard that comment made. And I would say quite the contrary. The emphasis has been on the diversity of the neighborhood, which was shown by Mr. Harvey's survey and the variety of architectural styles and materials and so on, as well as the diversity of the families who live in the neighborhood. We have families that range from young couples with very small children to retired people. So I think one of the primary goals of us engaging in the ND1 process, which I also have been involved on the committee for three years, has been to emphasize the diversity and also to make sure that everybody had an opportunity to participate in the many meetings, the 24 meetings, the committee meetings, the full neighborhood meetings, and many of the people who have been opposed did not attend those meetings to have their input there. So we welcome your support. It's been a long process, and we think it's a great outcome. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Simon. We have Donna Cornish and then Pat Price. Hi, my name is Donna Cornish. I live at 1236 Eldermill Road. My husband, Jim, who's been a huge part of this process for the whole four years, could not be here tonight. I'm going to read what he wrote. It's five minutes, so you have to cut me off when we get there. We have a three-minute limit, so. I know. So the home we live in is the house he grew up in. So it's been a family home since 1952 when his parents purchased it. We moved there in 1998. He grew up in the neighborhood and attended the local schools there. So it's that neighborhood feel that he's trying to preserve. Stanley Manning, who still lives on Castle at 94, they used to give out Cottrell's donuts, and they would visit his house twice at Halloween. So that's the kind of neighborhood it was. and he wants to kind of maintain that feel there. In his lifetime, only three homes have been built. Two were on the sides of a double lot, and third was built in the backyard of a corner lot. There have been no teardowns or rebuilds. It's been a very stable neighborhood. When we moved back to the neighborhood, many neighbors asked Jim to help restore the Neighborhood Association. Being a relatively small neighborhood, our first meetings were attended by a small group of people, but as we continued to have more meetings, more people attended. at the meetings we discussed survey results that were sent out Jim and I personally walked the neighborhood and in every single door we'd put the flyers letting people know about the meeting so we know people knew about them whether or not they attended them or not he collected all the email addresses that he could and sent those out as well so the communication process was open and everything was very public we never tried to hide anything We tried to have an open agenda throughout the entire process. When we did a survey, we wanted to ask the neighbors, you know, what was important to them, and they talked about the trees and the architecture. So, you know, we tried to, you know, follow that and put in the things that the neighbors wanted to have and preserve. Montclair is the type of neighborhood for which ND1 overlay was designed. We want to be protected from the oversized or out-of-character buildings on our lots. We need to be sure as a neighborhood we can stay for the rest of our lives. We all know neighborhoods where the characters change to the point where many homeowners leave. As a neighborhood, we want to make sure Montclair stays a place where responsible students, couples beginning their lives, and families together, professionals, and retirees want to live. We have that, so we ask you to please help us keep it. Thank you. Thank you very much. We have Pat Price and then Marie Copeland. Hello, I'm Pat Price. I live at 1262 Castle Road, and I, too, have lived there for a very long time. My family has owned that property ever since it was built, and I'm well aware of Mr. Manning's donuts because I grew up in the neighborhood. I'm here tonight just to comment that we really are appreciative of your efforts to help us with this, and we want to keep the neighborhood character. My comment is that the neighborhood is under pressure. There have been some early requests for townhouse construction. The house on Cooper has already been mentioned. That's in question whether it's actually a single-family dwelling or not. There's a lot of traffic from U.K., which can't be prevented, And I know that change is inevitable, but unfortunately change is not always a good thing. Sometimes it is. But there is a lot of traffic from UK and a lot of cut-through traffic. So that's just one of the comments. But the neighborhood is under a lot of pressure, and I appreciate your time. Thank you very much. Marie Copeland and then Nelson Copeland. Oh, your name's on the list. Maybe someone wanted you to speak. Okay. Well, they've been very helpful. But you would like to speak anyway, and you're sworn in. So if I call your name and you don't want to speak, just let me know. This is unofficial. I've lived there for a long time and I don't want to tell you how long I've lived there but it's been a long time and it's the only house we've ever owned and since we've started the ND1 process and it has evolved I see a stabilization of market value and people are more attracted to our homes they tend to sell quicker because this is almost a done deal. It is working. Thank you. Nelson Copeland, did you wish to speak? No. David Halfley, do you wish to speak? Yes. All right. Come forward, please. Vice Mayor and Mayors of the Council, thanks for the opportunity to briefly address you this afternoon. My name is David Halfley. I live at 708 Montclair Drive with my family. I've lived in the neighborhood 15 years now. I'm probably one of the few neighbors in the neighborhood that moved to Castle Avenue because of the diversity and the variety and the quality of the neighborhood, and we loved it so much that when our family grew, we literally moved around the corner to Montclair Drive, where I am today, and there's nothing like voting with your pocketbook to really make a statement in terms of your belief in an area. I think that the Planning Commission and the planning staff have done a very capable and professional job of reviewing this application. The study that Mr. Harvey did was very thorough and very complete and a very transparent and public process. There has been a great deal of effort by both staff and the Planning Commission and the neighborhood to bring this initiative to where it is today. I think one of the obligations of local government is to support the wishes and aspirations of the citizens and the taxpayers, and I think that there is a broad support for this initiative throughout the neighborhood, and I would encourage you to follow staff's recommendations and the Planning Commission's recommendations by approving this application this evening. Thank you. Thank you. Maura Hazard, do you wish to speak? No. Tom Meng, do you wish to speak? My name is Tom Meng. I've lived at 1207 Summit Drive for 26 years now. And I will tell you the secret, though, that Marie had lived there a long time before I got there. Our neighborhood was built. It was developed in the 1930s. It has been a very stable neighborhood with very little turnover. But one of the other commentators already has said that we are under tremendous pressures because of our proximity to the university. The neighborhood has enjoyed a good relationship with the university, and because of its proximity, a lot of the people who initially lived in our neighborhood were associated with the university in one way or another. But because of the growth of the university and the increased traffic and housing demands and parking demands, we are under a lot of pressure in the neighborhood. What we're trying to do here is just hold our own. We are trying to preserve it and just kind of break even with the pressures that we're under in the neighborhood. My final comment is, if you look at paragraph, I guess, 11, I don't think Mr. Getty maybe read it close enough. I don't think anybody needs a 20-foot driveway. I think he wanted a place to turn around and get out because he's on Tates Creek Road, which has so much traffic, but we specifically addressed that by allowing a turnaround in the front yard on Tates Creek and Cooper Drive, which have the heavy traffic counts in front of it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Tyrese, do you wish to speak? Thank you. My name is Ty Reese, and I live at 742 Montclair Drive. And like most of the people here, I've only been there for two and a half years. However, I will say that the neighborhood has been a major part of my life, as it was my grandparents' house. And I'm proud to be able to continue to live there. And if everything works out my way, this is the house that I – the last house that I will ever live in. And I just want to say, you know, I really think that the neighborhood is a unique neighborhood. And, you know, we've talked about the diversity and things like that, but I think that it's not only important to the people of our neighborhood, but it's important to the city of Lexington to maintain the neighborhood as it is and to avoid more of the big box dormitory type developments there. Because there's really not a lot of areas like our neighborhood in the city of Lexington and want to keep it that way. Thank you very much. Dick DeCamp, do you wish to speak? I do. Hi, I'll talk fast. My name is Dick DeCamp, and I live at 644 Montclair Drive. I've lived there for 44 years, and that was our starter house, and we never left it because we liked the neighborhood. We liked our house. It's a perfect location. And I want to tell you there hasn't been a neighborhood that has worked harder to not become a U.K. rental neighborhood. Now, the university talks about becoming a top 20. That means 8,000 to 10,000 more undergraduate students. Where are they going to put them? That's the university's problem, but they don't talk about any more dormitories. And where are those cars going to go? I'll tell you one thing, they're not going in the Montclair neighborhood. So we work very hard, but we're threatened all the time. I worked on the committee which established the ND1. Stan Harvey was our consultant, and Stan Harvey was our consultant with the Neighborhood Association. There isn't a better marriage that could be made in Lexington. Now, all of us, because I did and every one of you, have run on protecting our neighborhoods. And if you want to protect our neighborhoods, you vote this in and you vote it as we present it because we have worked very, very hard. And I can say that most of these people have worked a heck of a lot harder than I have. You will find that a large majority of the property owners are in favor of this overlay. And all of us know, I mean, I was down here for 12 years. There never has been a zone change where there's been, there haven't been objections. Of course there are objections. Nobody likes change, but this is a change which will be positive for all of us. And it's so important that we keep a good neighborhood in Lexington. And I think that if you look at this closely, and you will approve the ND1 request with a set of restrictions and help us save an important Lexington neighborhood. Thanks very much. Thank you. Now, Deborah, did you want to add something? We've exhausted the in favor list, and if you want to take a few more minutes, I think you should. Just take a quick moment. I'd like to tell you why we're here now rather than being accepted in December as we should have been. When we were here in October with the Planning Commission, we were going through things, And we discovered that the gentleman, Todd Johnson from HBAL and a few others, had some changes they'd like us to consider. Rather than ramming it through as it was, we said, yes, we'll wait, because we're really wanting to get these to be the best they can be. So Todd and Graham Pohl and Chip Roberts met with us and went over their six suggested changes, Three of them that you have in front of you are the verbiage changes, the ones on the pink sheet that simply have a line through them or words added. Those are the ones we accepted. We listened to their proposal for three additional changes, and quite frankly we didn't feel that they met our neighborhood association's goals. For example, one of them was to add stucco to an external surface. We have no stucco in our neighborhood, so we really didn't think we'd want to include that because that, again, would change character. Another was to decrease the garbage setback to 4 feet versus 10 feet, and that's a substantial change. We feel we have it where we would like it and where our neighborhood fits the best in that. Also, they were asking us to reduce the sidewall opening to be zero. We felt that sidewall needed to be kept at a 10% opening for windows and doors. And so we have worked with them. Three of their six proposed changes we've accepted, and three, we've decided it didn't fit our goals for ND1 for our neighborhood. We've worked with them, and we also have worked with them on a variance process to some degree. The variance process, we had some people who came in December who bought a very nice house on Eldemere, and they came here and they were asking to be allowed to make some changes for their property. They worked with us. They agreed to keep the four-foot driveway, but we agreed to let them move their driveway down or their garage down so it met what they needed for their house. So in other words, it's a give-and-take thing. And in variance, that's what it should be. We're not saying these rules are set in stone, but this is the guidelines we'd like our neighborhood to be served by. So we have worked with HBAL. We will continually work with them and hope that all neighborhoods that consider ND1 zoning or any other zoning work with them first before they have to go back and do it afterwards. And this was just a great art of compromise of not only HBAL, ourselves, and our neighborhood. and we are grateful to you for listening. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now I'd like to move on to Victoria Graff. We have a little presentation, and the gentleman is so kind to look that up for me. This is going to be a picture. The first thing you're going to see is a picture of my house. Do you mind to say your name and address? I'm Victoria Graff, and I live at 1234 Scoville Road. This is my house. This is the front of the house. It's a Cape Cod. I believe they went into that description last time. Can you flip to the next slide, please? This is the back of the house. It's got a screen porch, garage back there. Flip to the next one, please. This is an area that we want to do something to, which you'll see in the house plans, and then flip to the next slide. Since I only have three minutes, I'm trying to do this quick. And I took that sideways, but that's the screen porch. It's really not falling down. It's fine. Okay, and flip to the next one, please. This is proposed by my architect. Would you flip to the next one, please? And this probably isn't going to show up, but what we want to do is extend the back of the house to add a bathroom and a laundry room that's upstairs instead of in the basement. And that has a flat roof, and that's against these codes as I'll need it. Can you flip to the next slide? That's the upstairs, because what we're going to do is take the screen porch, which is already existing, and make it like an enclosed space. And up above that, we're going to extend one of the bedrooms. And that extension is going to be three feet longer than what the 55 feet is. So it's just going to be 58 feet. That roof line is going to go about maybe three feet above the existing roof line. So that also is a problem. So what I'm – can you flip to the next one? I guess I'm not sure. That's what the back of the house would look like. I think it's very lovely. And we're going to put a little screen porch back there in the mud room, and it's now going to be like to have an upstairs washer and dryer. But it does have a little flat projection on it, which I believe is against these codes. Flip to the next one, please. This is the side of the house. Of course, the houses are real close together there, and that – I don't think anybody would see that, but it is three feet longer than the, it's 58 instead of 55, and they had to do that to match the roof lines or something. But it is a little bit above. I don't know, actually it looks like it's kind of level there, but there may be a projection problem. I don't know because my architect read that. And is there another one? And that's just, you know, that's another of the building thing. And then go to another slide, please. And this just shows, I have like almost half an acre, and I've got a huge backyard, so this is not going to, nobody's really going to see it except me. So these are the things that I object to. Number two, the roof lines and shape. From what I read this, and they've struck out this flat roofs. I've got a flat roof over the laundry area and the extension of the bathroom. The building height, I believe that was over the code because I was wondering if they could change, you know, in my case Scoville to the 35 feet like the other streets have. And then the rear yard building setbacks can't be more than 55 feet, so I needed it to be 58 feet. So I guess what I'm asking for is, I know you're probably going to pass this, if I can get my plans grandfathered so I can build this addition to my house. Thank you very much. Jeff Fox, did you wish to speak? My name is Jeff Fox. I own the house at 1213 Scoville, and I do support the idea of maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood. I think that is important. is important. I think however the documents as drawn do a little bit restrictive and don't necessarily in all cases, specifically with the exterior building siding. My house is vinyl sided. There are multiple houses in the neighborhood that are vinyl sided. If I wanted to add to match that existing I could not do that given the only four types of siding that are allowed. They mentioned stucco. There are no stucco houses in the neighborhood but there are multiple vinyl sided houses in the neighborhood and I would have to add a brick addition are something which would not look right with my vinyl-sided house. There are multiple vinyl-sided houses in the neighborhood and multiple vinyl-sided additions. It's pretty restricted. I would also think that the driveways at 10 feet are not enough. On Scoville, there's no parking on the street. If you have a single driveway that you can only get to as in my house, depending on who lives when, you're going to be back and people are going to have to get up and move the car and drive back and forth. So I think some of those restrictions are not acceptable. Again, I support my neighbors. I thank them for the work they've done. I support maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood, but I do have some concerns about those restrictions, those specific too. Thank you. Thank you very much. Teresa Fox, did you wish to speak? Okay. Catherine Yunker. My name is Katie Yunker. I live at 809 Cooper Drive. I've lived and owned there for a little over 25 years. I hope to live there for another 25. I have three points that I would like to make, and we'll make them in the three minutes I'm given. One, I think that – well, I don't think – these restrictions will not preserve the character of the neighborhood. The gentleman mentioned that as to four characteristics, there was as high conformity as 90% with things. But as we all know, if that's a different 10% as to each of those four, we're already up to 40% nonconforming. On my block, the 800 block and my side of Cooper Drive, of the four houses that are there, three are nonconforming to my eye. My house, which is a very simple Depression-era Cape Cod-style house, has at least three violations. Roof pitch as to the dormer addition in the back. On the kitchen side of the house, there are insufficient openings on that wall. It's mostly brick. And the garage is neither set back sufficiently from the plane of the house, and it also has an outside stair because there is, in effect, an attic up above the garage, which is semi-detached. Obviously, if you have blocks where 75% of the houses couldn't have been built as they are now, and these are the way the houses were when I moved there, then pretty soon you are not going to be preserving the character of the neighborhood. Now, I understand that what is there is grandfathered, And generally, if something were destroyed and were to be replaced, it could be replaced. But you can't add on in the same character necessarily. And organically, the neighborhood cannot continue to grow and thrive by the same processes that it was originally built. My second point is about enforcement. And we've heard a lot about variances, and I appreciate that in some ways these are attempts to have objective criteria so as to make them easily understandable, whether you're inside or outside of the lines. But because of that, they do exclude a lot that we might all agree is perfectly fine. And then you are forcing people through the variance process, which is expensive and can be arbitrary. Furthermore, I'm not aware that the LFUCG is particularly overstocked with underemployed staff right now. There will be, there should be, additional enforcement and implementation burdens from this. My final point is really sort of about what is it that we're doing. We've heard a lot about the dorm house near KET, about the proposal of townhomes. That's taken care of by the existing zoning. If four different sets of students want to move into that house near KET, they can't do that. That is outside of the zoning. Townhouses are outside of the zoning. And so what it is that people fear isn't necessarily met by these standards, and instead it interferes with the homeowners. Ms. Schunker, your time's up. Thank you very much. Next is Kevin Compton. Kevin Compton My name is Kevin Compton. I live at 646 Cooper Drive. I'll be very brief. Most of my, I guess, objections have been covered by other people. I'd just like to point out this is my house on Cooper, and I recently did an addition on the back. This addition that I've done would have violated the proposed rules that you have before you today. I think the addition complements the structure. It's a mid-1930s Cape Cod. It would violate it based on the roof pitch, and I was limited because my roof ridge line, The height restricted, obviously, the heights on my additions on the back. If I'd gone higher, they would have projected from the front of the house, which my wife and I thought would look bad. My concern, and I think it's a concern that you've heard from other objectors, is that I think these guidelines might be overstepping their intent. There may be, and I have a question as to whether there is a better way to accomplish the overall goal. The primary goal, as has been mentioned, is to prevent the neighborhood from somehow being invaded by renters. I mean, yes, the neighborhood is well positioned. I just wonder, are there other rules in place that are doing that already? Thank you. Thank you very much. Now, I have one more name, which I apologize, I'm not sure what this name is. Did anyone sign up who wished to speak? Maybe the first name is Del? No. Okay, that's fine. Just wanted to be sure everybody had an opportunity. Now, I believe that the next step, Mr. Selle, is that you have a time to make additional comments if you wish. And because you're both staff and basically petitioner, correct, you can also rebut yourself. If you want to, or anyone else. I choose not to, Madam Chair. I was just going to come to the mic to say I really don't have any rebuttal comments. I'll be glad to answer questions from the Commission or the Council as we proceed. Very good. Thank you. Now, does anyone have, yes, did you have? Just a few rebuttals. Oh, yes. Again, I want to make sure that you know that we did everything we could to get our neighborhood to come to meetings. None of the opposing speakers today attended any of the 24 meetings we had on this process or not signed in at any of the 24 meetings we had. They didn't participate in the process until now, and that's very difficult for us, but it shows that there is a small percentage of people who are looking at something they've already built or something they want to build, and it's just now crossing their concern list. The other is we want to make sure you knew that anything that is not within our standards now that has already been built is grandfathered in on this process. It's nothing that anybody's going to have to go back and change. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now, is there anyone from the opposition who wants to sum up or rebut? Yes. Just so we're clear, I own the home at 1213 Scoville. Just so we're clear, my wife attended the meetings, and my daughter attended the meetings, and I spoke with you and I spoke with Mr. Harvey before the last meeting, and I'm an objector. Thank you. Is there any other opponent who wants to... Yes, sir. Are you sworn in? If you want to come to the podium, I'll swear you in, and then you can say your name and address. My name is Michael. Do you swear that everything you say will be the truth and nothing but the truth of you, God? I do. Okay. My name is Michael Hooper. I am the husband of Victoria Graff, who spoke here earlier in opposition. The main thrust of the opposition is not just picky things, and in fact I've spoken to some of the neighborhood members. They've really kind of put the shoe on the wrong foot here. They're trying to restrict things back in time to try to change a neighborhood. The so-called dorm house is already built. It's just standing there unoccupied, and so I guess they're trying to prevent that sort of thing from happening again. But the fact of the matter is there's quite a bit of student traffic through there. They've allowed student parking on that street, and they did not, a long time ago apparently, put in speed bumps on that street. So it's becoming more student-oriented by its very nature, and you do see students kind of racing down the street, and there are children that live in that neighborhood. Those sort of measures are the type of measures that should have been done already, and that would have changed the very character of the neighborhood. that would have probably required fighting against the University of Kentucky at some point because of the parking difficulties. But trying to restrict building and so forth with the, as we've said, very, very hodgepodge neighborhood. We've got gunner homes and bungalow homes and so forth, and to try to enforce in the past things that have already been built is just kind of ridiculous, I think. And I think probably some of these people are now appearing because they're suddenly realizing the full nature of what's going on here and perhaps expressing themselves about it. So can these things still be changed? Very possibly so. But I think that's the emphasis they need to put in zoning and parking and speed bumps and that sort of thing. That's going to really affect the nature of the neighborhood, not trying to be extremely picky about new building restrictions. The so-called dorm house is sitting there right now. They're not going to tear it down, so there's nothing they can do about that. That's all I want to say about that. Thank you very much. Now, this is actually, okay, Rochelle, I'm going to look at you because I see more hands going up. So do we just keep responding, or what's the protocol? That's kind of up to you, technically. You do have petitioners' presentation of rebuttal witness, which in essence would be those in favor. We have... I mean, there is an opportunity for opposition to rebut. You've already had two people. It's kind of up to you whether. Is there more rebuttal before we move into council questions? So can you just line up over there, please, by the podium if you want to rebut? If you're a petitioner, we'll take any more petitioner who want to rebut anything that's been said, and then we'll take opponents? Yes, I just want to rebut the last speaker who talked about speed bumps and parking and zoning. During my tenure on council representing this district, we looked in a number of times on speed bumps. They didn't work because the school buses would not take speed bumps, and that was the reason that that did not. You will find that most of the neighborhood blocks now have restricted parking, so there is no majority of the neighborhood U.K. parking. And as far as zoning, we are zoned R1. I don't know what more you can do about that except do the right thing and put an overlay on it. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Graff. I'm Victoria Graff. I live at 1, 2, 3, 4 Scoville. And I really don't know how all this works, but I've been learning. And I did come to the October meeting. I didn't know anything about this meeting in December where I would have been there with my house plans. But no one told me about that meeting, but I would have been happy to attend. I know when I came to the meeting in October, they did, there was a gentleman who has the international house, which is a flat house, and they exempted him from something. And I guess that's why I'm here today. It's just so these have my current house plans that I paid several thousand dollars for that I think what we're trying to build is in the character of the neighborhood would be grandfathered. I don't even know if you could do that, but you did it for this gentleman because he wanted to do another driveway because he was going to build a small house behind his existing house there at the corner. I believe it's Castle and Cooper. So that's why I'm here. Okay. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else? Okay, at this point, this is the opportunity for council members to ask questions of staff, petitioner, or opponents. And then petitioners and opponents will have the right to rebut any new evidence that comes up via council questions. So, Council Member Lawless. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm Diane Lawless, and this is 3rd District. I'm the 3rd District Council person, and this is in my district. And just briefly, the neighborhoods in the 3rd District have suffered mightily on many levels. And there are a lot of people that have lived there a long time, and there are a lot of people that have a lot of opinions, usually all wanting the same goal. But when I see 70.6% of the people in one of my neighborhoods agreed on something, I'm pretty impressed. So that being said, I do have questions about the grandfathering in of the plans for Ms. Graff. Is that something that would be possible since it appears they do, in fact, match the current look or whatever of her house? I don't know if those plans have been reviewed by our building inspection department, so I'm not sure whether there has been, for instance, a building permit issued. If there had been a building permit issued, then that would be a vested right to proceed with that permit. Do you want to come to the podium and answer that question first? Yes. I did get them approved, but you have a time frame that you have to dig ground, and so that's why I just wanted to, if we don't start within this, I think we got them in October, so I would like to have it extended. That's the thing. I have a copy of that. I think she can approach the Division of Building Inspection about attenuation of the permit. So if she has a permit and just hasn't started construction, then I would think that that would automatically grandfather her in. I think if she has a building permit, that's the key. And if we didn't start it until September and the building permit's expired, is there something in your minutes that would say that I would be allowed to? Because he's going to look at this new N1 overlay and say, we can't do this now. Because he explained that to me when I was doing this, that there was somebody else who was trying to do it, and after the six months you can't go back. I think Mr. Saleh had an answer. I was just going to encourage Ms. Graff not to let that permit expire and also to talk with the Division of Building Inspection about possibly extending that permit. I've been told it's not possible after six months, so I have to do it by April the 20th, I think, or something. So that's why I'm here is to extend it. Because they did it for this other gentleman. He wanted to go against the rules of the driveway and all this, and they said, yes, that's okay. Now, had I been at this meeting, maybe I could have addressed it with those folks instead of having to do this today. Maybe this is a question for Ms. Bolin. All that would be necessary would be the start of the construction by September or whatever date that is. If you could just give me until December, you know, a year, a year. If September is fine, but a year, just extend it. I think that, you know, starting construction doesn't mean it has to be built by then. Yeah, I understand. It can, you know, you can start digging up your backyard or something. I don't know. But I suggest you get with building inspection. and September, this is January, that's quite a... Okay, that's fine. If you can put it in your minutes so I can approach him. Well, you can always approach him, but, you know, like I say, you might approach them about what constitutes starting construction, and if you have started construction, if Ms. Bolin, correct me if I'm wrong, if you've started construction, you can get an extension. Yes, but if you can say in your minutes that I got until September, that would be very hard. We can't do that. If the council isn't here to make that, they're to decide that. Yeah, that's building inspection. I'm just suggesting that you talk to them about what constitutes starting construction. And if you're saying that since the plans were approved prior to this, they may be willing to extend it. Okay. And if you have started construction at any level, that generally will give you an extension. Is that correct? The other question I had was the gentleman who, I'm sorry, I didn't write down your name, spoke about having his home as all vinyl siding and that if he were to, Jeff Fox, I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. Fox. If he wanted an addition, that would be something that he would get a variance, could go and try to get a variance for? Rather than a variance, he probably would have to file a similar application to the Planning Commission asking for a change to that restriction. The way restriction number one is worded, he could replace his existing vinyl with vinyl. but anything new would have to meet one of these other material types. Okay. And could you explain to us and to the people, our viewing audience and our audience present, what the variance process is like? We've not had anyone ask for it yet, although it's been something that someone could approach the Planning Commission for for now a couple of years. after the Chevy Chase ND1 was approved, it became aware that there needed to be a similar process to a Board of Adjustment variance for citizens that wanted to change the ND1 restrictions on their property. So it has been crafted in a way where the filing deadline, the time of review, the fees, the application materials are very similar. But it would, in essence, be a conditional zoning restriction that would be reviewed by the Planning Commission at one of their monthly meetings. And like a variance at the Board of Adjustment, there would be mailed notice to property owners in the area telling them the date and time of the meeting. Okay, thank you. Council Member Blues. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Actually, my question had to do with Mr. Fox's situation, so that question has been answered. Okay, thank you. Council Member Lawless. As far also the comment about speeding and parking, I know some of the streets over there do have residential parking permits. And if there are any of you all that don't have them and would like to have them, if you will contact my office, we are very glad we've gotten that approved for several streets in the third district in the last couple of years and would be very happy to work with you on getting residential parking permits. And oddly enough, speed bumps are probably one of the most controversial things in the city. So, but, you know, certainly there's signage that can be available, extra patrols if there are problems, and we can even petition to reduce the speed limit on roads, and I'm more than happy to work with you all on that. Thank you. Thank you. Are there other council members who have questions? I'd like to ask Dr. Fox a question, please, and then follow up with a question of Ms. Tatum. Is your house entirely vinyl? Yes. It was when we bought it. Actually, my daughter lives there. It was aluminum siding that was falling off. The house is a Gunnison house. It's very small, and it's not financially feasible to put brick or something on that house. So we upgrade. I think it looks very nice, and there's a lot of neighborhoods in that area. I have no plans to do anything now, but I'm just thinking matching existing, what's wrong with vinyl siding anyway? But it's entirely vinyl. It's entirely vinyl. Okay, thank you. Ms. Tatum, could I ask you, in your meetings, did you discuss in reference to the vinyl siding, if a home was 100% vinyl, whether an addition could be in vinyl? Yes, we did discuss that. Our neighborhood has a lot of trees, and one of the reasons we decided against vinyl siding is because on the north side of our properties, they usually get mold. A lot of this cementous fiber or hardy board, as it's called, can be made, actually it can be painted to look exactly like you want it to look. But we did discuss if someone had a completely vinyl house, their ability should be going through the variance process, and it's substantiating itself saying we're already vinyl, we'd like to complete vinyl, but we don't really want vinyl as a core material in our houses. Okay, thank you very much. Is there any other council member who has a question or comment? Council Member Crosby. I guess you just confused me more than so what you're saying. I mean, I've been personally, oftentimes I have a problem when people have personal property in a home that they can't do something. but I do see a need, thanks to lots of education by the former third district council member and the current third district council member, about the issues you all are facing. But if somebody has an entire vinyl home and they want to do an addition, which is approved by your overlay as far as the addition and the requirements, but were you just saying that you wouldn't allow them because you all don't want any, or would that be? We'd have to go through the variance process, and I'm sure the city or the planning committee that would hear that, isn't it the planning commission that would hear that, is smart enough to be able to say this house is all vinyl. Yes, we'll approve the variance, letting them go back to all vinyl. It's new vinyl that we really are not trying. We're trying to get people to replace with things that have more character than plastic vinyl. We don't have a lot of plastic vinyl houses. Well, I understand that, and they may be the exception to the rule over there, and that's why if they wanted to do something, I was just trying to get a feel for if that would be an objection by the neighborhood, because when you go through the Planning Commission, then you have. No, if it's replacing exactly what it has, I don't think our neighborhood council would object to it. But, again, it would need to go through the variance process. Okay, that answers that question. Thank you. And then the other question I had, Mr. Salee, was that Ms. Graff was told that she could not get an extension. I mean, I don't know who she was told that by. I can't imagine it was LFECG. But that is something that's, I don't want to say common, but it's not something that cannot happen. So can you just clarify? I wish I could. I also am not aware that prior building permits cannot be continued. And like Council Member Lawless, my understanding was if construction had begun, then a permit could be renewed to complete or continue that construction. So I knew that there was initially a six-month timeline for construction to commence once a building permit had been issued, but I was not aware that those could not be extended. Okay. Thank you. Are there other council members who have questions? Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Mr. Selle, in just general terms, how dissimilar are the variance process, quote-unquote, and a zone change? The process we've talked about tonight really is a zone change, but it does not have to come back to the council. The way the ordinance is worded when the conditional zoning restriction is imposed by the planning commission, they can determine changes to those conditional zoning restrictions such as ND1 restrictions. But it has a different filing deadline. It has a 400-foot notice radius instead of 200 as the Board of Adjustment does. And my earlier comments about how it was attempted to be molded as close to a Board of Adjustment variance is the reason for that, even including timeline, how long it takes. So it's kind of a lightened process then? It is, absolutely. That would cost half as much as a zone change might? The planning staff, well, with Board of Adjustment, the planning staff offers service to citizens on application materials, and that's anticipated in this process as well. So there would not need to be surveys done of property and things of that nature the way we would for many zone changes that you see on the council. Thank you. You're welcome. Council Member Lawless. Yes. This is back to the house that's 100% vinyl, and you said there are very few that are 100% vinyl. I can actually look through the. Well, let me just throw this out. Would an amendment to this that any house that was 100% vinyl or 99% vinyl or whatever wanted to make an addition and use vinyl, would that be objectionable to you all? Can you please come to the mic to answer? I'm sorry, but I don't feel comfortable as an individual addressing that for my entire group. Would you find it, most of our board members are sitting over here, so would you find it objectionable? You would find it objectionable? Can you please repeat? Yes, she said without Stan Harvey, who has done most of our planning and most of our investigation in our neighborhood, I think without him here it would be difficult, is what Kathy Simon just said. Okay, thank you. Do any other council members have questions? Okay, now the next step is that the petitioner or opponents are entitled to rebut anything new that has come up within the council questioning. So do you want to rebut anything? If you do, please line up and restate your name and address, and this must be about new evidence brought up in the council questioning. Okay. It actually was in response to something that Councilmember Lawless said, and it's really... Can you say your name again? I'm so sorry. Katie Yunker, 809 Cooper Drive. Thank you. And it was just about the 70% in support. If I recall correctly, there were 102 responding postcards. And I just had a question about how many residential structures are there that are affected by the, that would be affected by the overlay? Did someone give an answer? Everything. This is all, this is illegal. It was 179. This is 179 houses in the neighborhood. Okay, thank you. And 179 postcards were sent out and 102 responded. Okay. So of those who responded, it was 70 percent, but there were the people who didn't respond, which would have included me at that point. And I understand, but it isn't as though you can say from that that 70 percent of those who own or live in the neighborhood support this. My other point was that there was a survey done of four. This needs to have to do with the new evidence, does it? About the four elements, and we've heard a lot about the vinyl siding. My understanding is that siding elements were not something that were looked at for present nonconformities. Is that correct? Planning staff did not analyze vinyl siding for nonconformity. I, you know, and I do not wish to create more work for people on this, but it does seem that from the concerns that have been expressed and by council members as well, that if there is some concern about that we are excluding a lot of things that are there now by these rules or would potentially exclude things that are there now, that perhaps a fuller survey should be done to see exactly how much is nonconforming. There are a lot of garages that are built back in almost into the hill that are, of course, flush with their building and so would violate potentially the setback restriction on garages, for example, and things like that. Thank you. This is the reason we're so picky about this, that everything be on the mic, is this is a legal proceeding which could go to court. We never know. And so we have to follow specific rules and have all comments on the record. And I'm Victoria Graff at 123 for Scoville again. And I was going to respond to the same thing, the 70%. This little postcard came in, and, yes, we filled it out, But I think it was misleading. I don't know that the people really knew what they were doing. I mean, I wasn't sure that it was that important at that time. I didn't know this was the final vote. And for it to be, you know, said that it's 70 percent of the people when you had 179 houses. Now, I understand you can't get everybody to vote and you can't get everybody to do, but I don't think that comment of 70 percent is correct because I don't think those people really maybe understood how important that postcard was. Thank you. Did you want to rebut new evidence? If it pertains to the question of the percentage that was brought up? The council questioning. That Ms. Lawless brought up about the percentage? Yes. Of the postcards that were returned? Is that what, that was, this is, I'm Catherine Simon. This would be the time to do that if you. I'm Catherine Simon at 1233 Scoville Road, and I'm one of the people who would take the postcards and the, sorry, the information about the postcards around and put them in the houses. So we feel like everybody had plenty of information that was very clearly spelled out for people to return the postcards. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else among petitioners or opponents who wishes to rebut new evidence brought up in Council questioning? Now's your chance. All right. If not, I declare the hearing closed, and I want to thank all of you for attending and for speaking. And it is at this point in the meeting that any motions can be made. Council Member Lawless. Yes, I move that we accept the ND1 overlay as passed by the Planning Commission with the additional wording that was on the pink sheet. If you allow me, the motion needs to be to adopt, if this is your intent, the findings of fact proposed. I would like to adopt the findings of fact that were proposed. Did I hear it? So your motion is to adopt the findings of fact from the Planning Commission with the addendum? Yes. And Council Member Bill Farmer has seconded the motion. So we have a motion on the floor. Do I hear any discussion? Council Member Peggy Henson? We have to accept it as is. We can't amend it or? Well, Council Member Lawless has made the motion to accept the findings of fact as given to us with the addendum, the compromises that they came to. Right, with this. The pink sheet. Okay. Did you have an amendment? The council has every right to amend. I was looking for the type of siding. I saw it earlier. Now I can't find it. I think it's number one. It doesn't allow for vinyl siding, but personally I would like to amend it to say with your existing material, you know, whatever your house was built of, then that's what it should be. I don't really know how to say it, but like if your house is vinyl and you do an addition, then it would be okay to do it in vinyl. If your house is brick or whatever and you do an addition, then it should be in brick. Well, that would be more restrictive, actually, than what they have here. Because if you had a brick home and you wanted to do an addition, you could do it in hardy plank. I guess I would say the, okay, I see what you're saying. So did you want to make that motion or not? to amend. I would like to amend it to say if your house currently has anything other than these materials such as vinyl, then you would have the option of replacing or doing an addition with the vinyl. I would like it to be an option. Is there a second to the amendment? Motion to amend. I second. Now, can you please restate your motion so it's very clear? Your motion is to amend. To be given the option of using the same material that your house currently has, exterior material. If you're doing an addition, is that what your motion is? And, Council Member Ford, is that the motion you wanted to second? Yes, Vice Mayor. Okay. The motion to amend is on the table to be discussed. Is there any discussion? Council Member Lawless? I'm torn on that somewhat, but because it is so few houses in the neighborhood that are all vinyl, and there is an option to get a variance to add on with vinyl, and that some of the hardy plank, for instance, often can look much like vinyl. It's not a completely different material. Hardy plank is a wonderful product. I have a hardy plank garage. So because they have the option for a variance and because there is a product that would match, to the best of my understanding, the vinyl, the hardy plank, that it is an undue concern and involves very few houses. So... Council Member Crosby. Thank you, Vice Mayor. This is one that I'm torn on as well because I agree with the intent of the amendment, even though it's only a few houses. The problem with the variance as an option is oftentimes that is an additional expense on the homeowner who's already spending a lot of money on trying to improve their property or they draw plans and they have to go through a whole process with us. And then to come down and fight for a variance often, in many cases, involves attorneys and other unintended, I think, expenditures. So if it's so few homes that might be affected, then if they wanted to keep with the material or have the option to be able to use the other approved material, I mean, they're not changing really the character of their house by the other requirements, and they're keeping with the material that they currently have. So that's right by myself a little torn because I don't think it's less restrictive. I think it actually gives them some options besides having to go through the variance process. Council Member Lawless. Yes, I was wondering if Mr. Johnson could weigh in on this about the hardy plank material being one that could be used to match the vinyl siding on an addition. Sorry to do this to you. Wow. Rock or hard place. I'm sorry, what did you say? I said rock or hard place. Hardy Plank is an exceptional material. We tried to stay out of the discussion on the vinyl or not vinyl issue when we were dealing with the neighborhood group that was working on the ND1 because there was opposition to it. If I do remember correctly in Mr. Harvey's overview at the Planning Commission, About one-third of the houses in the neighborhood have or are vinyl. We do. I think the question is if they're all vinyl and they are doing addition, not if they have some vinyl. 39 or siding. Which is siding of all types. Siding of all types, okay. But in regards to hardy plank, the thing with hardy plank is it's much more expensive than vinyl siding. But if you're putting on an addition, you'd have to cover it with something. Well, yeah, but your question was the vinyl versus hardy plank is that option on a vinyl house? No. My question was if you were building an addition to a house that was all vinyl, Mm-hmm. Would hardy plank be a material that could be used that would match the existing structure so you wouldn't have this, you know, mix of materials that would. Well, it would be a definitely different material, and it would probably be obvious that it's a different material. Okay, that was my question. Thank you. Council Member Kay. Thank you. I turned it off instead of turning it on. I'm inclined to be supportive in general of the ND1. I think it's a good thing for neighborhoods. It is experienced by some people as unduly restrictive. I think in this particular case of this amendment, since there are very few buildings with vinyl at the moment, and they would have to conform with the rest of the conditions under ND1, I would support the amendment. as proposed to give a little bit more latitude to those people in the neighborhood who feel that the new overlay would be restrictive on their options. Are there other Council members who wish to speak? Council Member Hanson, I... Oh, I'm sorry. Council Member Lawless, did you want to speak? I just wondered if you could repeat the amendment. I was just about to. I asked planning and law to write it down, and let's see if this reflects your motion. The motion is to amend the, what are we calling it, the pink sheet. That's not very official. Planning staff exhibit. Planning staff exhibit to say on the first point, allowable exterior siding, finish building materials are brick, stone, cementitious fiberboard siding, natural wood, or the same material as the existing structure. Does that reflect your motion? That's what planning and law have. So that would be the motion on the floor to amend to include that. So, Council Member Kaye. I hate to second guess planning staff. I think you need to have a percentage. I think, you know, and somebody suggested maybe 90%. If 90% of the building, otherwise if you had any vinyl on your building, it would allow you to use vinyl. I think the intent is you have a building that's predominantly vinyl siding. You want to include that in the language. So, Council Member Henson, do you want to add that to your amendment? or did Council Member Kaye, did you want to make a motion to amend the amendment? It's much easier if you change it, Council Member Henson, if that's what you want to do. Can you turn on your mic, please? Okay, you're thinking. You know, I'm not sure about the percentage, but I think Council Member Kaye is correct. I don't know, 80%. What do you think? 90. That's what he mentioned. Okay. We could go 100. But we'll say they might have a brick post. So 90 would be good. So you'd like to change your amendment motion to include Mr. Salley, or where would you recommend we put that percentage, or the same material as 90% of the existing structure? Would that reflect the motion on the floor? and does the seconder accept that change? Yes, Vice Mayor, I accept. Okay. So the motion on the floor then is to amend, and I'm just going to read the part that's the motion under allowable exterior siding finished building materials, and it lists several natural wood or the same material as 90% of the existing structure. Is there more discussion, Mr. Lane? Vice Mayor, let's suppose your house is hit by a falling tree, and 50% of it is vinyl and 50% of it is brick, and the part that was vinyl was crushed and you wanted to replace it under this regulation, you couldn't do so. So, I mean, there are a lot of unintended consequences when you start writing restrictive covenants. So I think it's not that good of an idea for us to try to do that on the short here in the council meeting. Rochelle is shaking her head. Do you have a comment before I go on? Under grandfathering, if there is an act that causes destruction of what was existing, it can be replaced, repaired in kind as it was before. So that should, I mean, I think in most circumstances that should respond to that and not create a hardship. Thank you. Finished. I just wanted to bring up that thought for you. Okay. Okay. Councilmember Beard. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Visualize a box faced by brick, and both sides in the rear with vinyl would not meet a 90% dictate, would it? That would be 75%. So while we put 90% in there, there's no situation I can think that would where it would be operable. That's it. Council Member Kay. I think we're forgetting that there's a process for variance. So we're not trying to kind of cover all the bases, but as many as we can. In these situations, the person still has the option of going through an appeals process or a variance process. I think in this particular instance, we were hoping to help a specific situation avoid having to do that. We can't avoid all of them. So this amendment may not cover everything, but it attempts to cover a specific situation. Rebut. I don't think it will cover anything, to tell you the truth. I just don't see what type of situation where you would have 10 percent one material and 90 percent vinyl. It doesn't make any sense to me. Are there other comments by Council Members? If not, the motion on the floor is to amend the exterior materials section to say allowable exterior siding finished building materials are brick, stone, semantitious, fiberboard citing natural wood or the same material as 90% of the existing structure. So we will take a vote. And I don't... I think we can do a voice vote, can we not, on the amendment? Okay. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Aye. We have two opposed, Council Member Lane and Council Member Beard, and the rest four. So that was the amendment. So, Council Member Lawless, that motion amended your motion to accept the findings of fact from the Planning Commission and the Planning Addendum. So that amended motion is now on the floor. Is there any discussion? All right. I believe we need to take the vote with the Council Clerk to accept these findings of fact. If you'll call the roll, please. Mr. Farmer? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Ford? Yes. Ms. Gorton? Aye. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. Kay? Yes. Mr. Lane? No. Ms. Lawless? Yes. Mr. Beard? No. Mr. Blues? Yes. Ms. Crosby? Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Thank you. That motion passes 7 to 2, 8 to 2. Whoops, now it went to 9 to 2. That's just an electronic glitch, I think. Now, do you have a motion, Ms. Lawless, about the ordinance? It would be appropriate at this time to move to approve the ordinance. I move to approve the ordinance as amended. Second. Is there discussion? No. All right. Who was the motion seconder, please? Council Member Ellinger seconded. Council Member Lawless made the motion. Will you call the roll, please? Mr. Farmer? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Ford? Yes. Ms. Gordon? Aye. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. Kay? Yes. Mr. Lane? No. Ms. Lawless? Yes. Mr. Beard? No. Mr. Blues? Yes. Ms. Crosby? And Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Thank you. And that motion passes 9 to 2. And I want to thank everyone for being here and participating and for all your hard work. Thank you. Do I hear a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Second? Second. Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? The meeting is adjourned. Thank you.