# Planning Commission Meeting - August 9, 2012 > Auto-transcribed civic record · August 9, 2012 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2641 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2641?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2012-08-09 - **Last revised**: July 17, 2026 - **Length**: 18,607 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 Urban County Planning Commission met on August 9, 2012, at 1:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the Urban County Government Building, 200 East Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky. Mike Owens presided over the meeting, which included 10 agenda items and resulted in 10 motions and votes. The Commission heard 5 public comments during the session. The meeting covered a range of planning and zoning matters. The Commission approved the minutes from the previous meeting and processed a consent agenda with no discussion items. Several development proposals were approved, including a development plan for Victory Apostolic Church, Inc. (DP 2012-62), a unit plan for Masterson Hills & Masterson Station, Unit 10 (PLAN 2003-209P), and an amendment to the Red Mile Mixed-Use Development zoning district plan (ZDP 2012-13). The Commission also approved matters related to performance bonds and letters of credit, and adopted a resolution honoring a former Planning Commission member. One item was postponed or withdrawn during the meeting. The Commission denied an appeal by Michael Hayes (BOAR 2012-1). The meeting concluded with approval of a motion to initiate a zoning ordinance text amendment. ## Attendance **Present:** Mike Owens, Eunice Beatty, Will Berkley, Carla Blanton, Mike Cravens, Karen Mundy, Carolyn Plumlee, Lynn Roche-Phillips, and William Wilson. **Absent:** Patrick Brewer and Frank Penn. **Late:** Will Berkley arrived after the meeting had begun. ## Votes and Decisions All votes taken during the August 9, 2012 meeting passed unanimously with 9 ayes, 0 nays, and 0 abstentions. **Minutes Approval** [0:33:59] The minutes from June 14, 2012 were approved on a motion by Eunice Beatty, seconded by Carla Blanton. Eight members voted in favor. **DP 2012-60 Postponement** [0:35:34] A motion by Mike Cravens, seconded by Will Berkley, to postpone DP 2012-60 (Sebastian Property, Unit 2) to August 23, 2012 passed unanimously. **Consent Agenda** [0:39:17] The Consent Agenda items, excluding Victory Apostolic Church, were approved on a motion by Lynn Roche-Phillips, seconded by Karen Mundy. **DP 2012-62: Victory Apostolic Church, Inc.** [0:44:51] The development plan was approved with a condition to relocate the dumpster to the southeast corner of the parking lot. Motion by Lynn Roche-Phillips, seconded by Karen Mundy. **PLAN 2003-209P: Masterson Hills & Masterson Station, Unit 10** [0:51:34] The preliminary subdivision plan was approved with revised conditions including denoting a 50-foot "No Disturbance" area around the cemetery, submittal of cemetery map, denoting screening and landscaping requirements, and noting that excessively deep lotting will be reviewed with any Final Record Plat. Motion by Mike Cravens, seconded by Eunice Beatty. **ZDP 2012-13: Red Mile Mixed-Use Development (AMD)** [0:56:53] Reapproval was granted with the original 11 conditions, including Urban County Council rezoning to MU-3, various engineering and planning approvals, pedestrian connections to public sidewalks, and resolution of building lot line conflicts at final development plan stage. Motion by Will Berkley, seconded by Eunice Beatty. **Bond Release and Call** [0:57:28] Approval of release and call of bonds as detailed in the August 9, 2012 memorandum passed on a motion by Mike Cravens, seconded by Eunice Beatty. **BOAR 2012-1: Michael Hayes Appeal** [2:10:10] The appeal regarding Certificate of Appropriateness for wood-clad vinyl windows at 354 & 358 Oldham Avenue was disapproved. Motion by Will Berkley, seconded by Eunice Beatty. **Zoning Text Amendment: Private Walkways** [2:21:02] Initiation of a zoning text amendment to prohibit construction of private walkways facilitating illegal vehicular parking passed on a motion by Mike Cravens, seconded by Lynn Roche-Phillips. **Zoning Text Amendment: Notification Area** [2:26:11] Initiation of a zoning text amendment to increase notification area for zone change applications from 400 to 500 feet passed on a motion by Will Berkley, seconded by Lynn Roche-Phillips. ## Public Comment Five speakers addressed the Board regarding a window replacement appeal in the historic district. **Michael Hayes** [timestamp: 1:14:29] appealed the Board of Architectural Review's denial of wood-clad vinyl windows for his property. He argued that the windows are visually indistinguishable from original wood windows when viewed from the street, offer improved energy efficiency, and support affordable housing goals. He requested approval based on the visual and functional integrity of the windows and the intent of the historic district guidelines. **Amelia Armstrong** [timestamp: 1:07:44], Historic Preservation staff, presented visual evidence of the window replacement and confirmed that vinyl windows do not comply with design guidelines, regardless of wood cladding. She stated that the Board of Architectural Review's decision was consistent with established precedent and the intent of the guidelines. **Jim Dickinson** [timestamp: 1:40:15] supported the staff recommendation to uphold the Board's decision. He noted that Mr. Hayes bypassed the proper approval process and destroyed existing windows without a permit. Mr. Dickinson emphasized that design guidelines explicitly prohibit vinyl windows regardless of cladding, and warned that allowing exceptions would undermine the integrity of the historic preservation process. **Carla Blanton** [timestamp: 1:54:28] expressed concern that the process lacks common sense, particularly when a visually indistinguishable, energy-efficient window is denied. She questioned whether the law should be reevaluated to reflect modern materials and affordability considerations. **Mike Cravens** [timestamp: 1:55:30] stated that the code is clear: no vinyl windows are permitted. He emphasized that violating the code, even with good intentions, sets a dangerous precedent and noted that alternatives such as wood windows remain available. ## Contested Items **Approval of Wood-Clad Vinyl Windows at 354 & 358 Oldham Avenue** A heated discussion arose regarding an appeal for approval of wood-clad vinyl windows at two properties on Oldham Avenue. The core disagreement centered on balancing historic preservation requirements against practical affordability considerations. Commissioners were divided on whether the visual and functional equivalence of the proposed windows justified granting an exception to the existing explicit vinyl ban. The debate reflected a fundamental tension between maintaining strict adherence to preservation standards and accommodating property owners' cost constraints when alternatives met similar performance criteria. ## Approval of Minutes The minutes from the June 14, 2012, meeting were presented for approval. [timestamp: 00:33:59] Eunice Beatty moved to approve the minutes, and Carla Blanton seconded the motion. The minutes were approved unanimously. ## Postponements or Withdrawals [timestamp: 00:35:34] The board considered a motion to postpone DP 2012-60: Sebastian Property, Unit 2. Mike Cravens and Will Berkley were the key speakers on this item. The motion to postpone the item was approved unanimously. As a result, DP 2012-60: Sebastian Property, Unit 2 was moved to the August 23, 2012, meeting. ## Consent Agenda - No Discussion Items The consent agenda was presented for approval at the meeting on August 9, 2012. [timestamp: 00:39:17] **Speakers:** Chris King and Bill Sallee **Action Taken:** The consent agenda was approved with one exception. Item DP 2012-62: Victory Apostolic Church was pulled from the consent agenda for separate discussion and consideration. All remaining consent agenda items were approved unanimously. ## DP 2012-62: Victory Apostolic Church, Inc. The plan for Victory Apostolic Church, Inc. was presented as agenda item 1a and discussed by Bill Martin and Jason Banks [timestamp: 0:44:51]. **Outcome** The plan was approved. A new condition was added to the approval requiring relocation of the dumpster to the southeast corner of the parking lot. This condition was agreed upon by both staff and the applicant prior to the vote. **Discussion** No objections were raised during the discussion of this agenda item. ## PLAN 2003-209P: Masterson Hills & Masterson Station, Unit 10 [timestamp: 00:51:34] The preliminary subdivision plan for Masterson Hills & Masterson Station, Unit 10 was presented for discussion and approval. Key speakers on this item included Chris Taylor and Rory Kahly. The plan was approved with revised conditions focused on cemetery protection. The specific requirements established include: * A 50-foot no disturbance zone around the cemetery * Submission of a cemetery map * Compliance with zoning ordinance requirements The outcome of the discussion was approval of the preliminary subdivision plan. ## ZDP 2012-13: Red Mile Mixed-Use Development (AMD) Chris Sallee presented the reapproval of the zoning development plan for the Red Mile Mixed-Use Development [timestamp: 0:56:53]. The plan required recertification because the prior approval had expired and needed to be renewed within a two-week window. The zoning development plan was reapproved with the original 11 conditions intact. No modifications to the conditions were made during this recertification process. **Outcome:** The plan was approved. ## Performance Bonds and Letters of Credit The board discussed the release and call of bonds as outlined in the August 9, 2012, memorandum. Key speakers on this agenda item included Mike Cravens and Eunice Beatty. [timestamp: 0:57:28] The discussion resulted in unanimous approval of the bond matters presented in the memorandum. No specific concerns or objections were raised during the deliberation. ## Resolution for Former Planning Commission Member A resolution honoring Marie Copeland was presented and approved during this meeting [timestamp: 2:26:43]. **Presentation** Mike Owens presented the resolution, which recognized Copeland's four years of service and dedication to the Planning Commission and the community. **Outcome** The resolution was approved. ## BOAR 2012-1: Michael Hayes Appeal [timestamp: 2:10:10] The Commission considered an appeal of the Board of Architectural Review's (BOAR) denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness for wood-clad vinyl windows. **Key Participants** The discussion involved Barbara Rackers, Amelia Armstrong, Michael Hayes, and Jim Dickinson. **Decision** The Commission denied the appeal and upheld the BOAR's original decision to deny the Certificate of Appropriateness. The denial was based on design guidelines that prohibit vinyl windows. ## Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Initiation The Commission initiated a text amendment to the zoning ordinance regarding notification requirements for zone change applications. [timestamp: 2:26:11] **Proposal** The amendment proposes increasing the notification area for zone change applications from 400 feet to 500 feet. This change would improve consistency with the notification requirements already in place for conditional use permit applications. **Key Participants** Chris King and Chris Taylor were the primary speakers on this agenda item. **Outcome** The Commission approved the initiation of the zoning ordinance text amendment. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (8-0): Approval of minutes from June 14, 2012 - **Motion** — passed (9-0): Postponement of DP 2012-60: Sebastian Property, Unit 2 to August 23, 2012 - **Motion** — passed (9-0): Approval of Consent Agenda items excluding Victory Apostolic Church - **DP 2012-62** — passed (9-0): Approval of Victory Apostolic Church, Inc. development plan with 16th condition to relocate dumpster to southeast corner of parking lot - **PLAN 2003-209P** — passed (9-0): Approval of Masterson Hills & Masterson Station, Unit 10 preliminary subdivision plan with revised conditions - **ZDP 2012-13** — passed (9-0): Reapproval of Red Mile Mixed-Use Development (AMD) with original 11 conditions - **Motion** — passed (9-0): Approval of release and call of bonds as detailed in memorandum dated August 9, 2012 - **BOAR 2012-1** — passed (9-0): Disapproval of appeal by Michael Hayes regarding Certificate of Appropriateness for wood-clad vinyl windows at 354 & 358 Oldham Avenue - **Motion** — passed (9-0): Initiation of zoning text amendment to prohibit construction of private walkways facilitating illegal vehicular parking - **Motion** — passed (9-0): Initiation of zoning text amendment to increase notification area for zone change applications from 400 to 500 feet --- ## Full transcript I gotta give her an extra dose of faith and forgiveness that I'm waiting for her to exercise. See, on that assembly line, it was already known what you were gonna go through. She's gonna go, ba-boom, ba-boom, ba-boom, ba-boom. And when he hits the bottom, when she hits the bottom, every single time they'll go, mm. I just believe. Yes, yes. Yes, yes. I just believe that like that Mattel toy, we were all built to last. I did this 10 years ago at a doctor's, a surgeon's convention, and the surgeon said, I'm going out right now. I'm buying a miniature Mattel toy. I'm putting it on every desk on my office. Because, see, when it gets hard, I always tell people, all you have to do is say is Tonka, Tonka, Tonka time. Come on, y'all, help me. It's Tonka, Tonka, Tonka time. Everybody, it's Tanka, Tanka, Tanka time. And all you need to do is take yourself back to that moment and know, oh, it's just Tanka time. No big problem. It's just Tanka time. I'm built to last. I'm built to outlast such a time as this. I'm not just built to survive it. I'm built to thrive through it and stand on it. I'm not going to stand in it. I'm going to stand on it. I'm not going to live out of it. I'm going to build from it. And so I just stopped by Kentucky to talk to your heart, to touch your heart, to inspire your mind. A lot of people thought I shouldn't have made it. How did she do it? See, I'm the same girl who got a fail in English the last time I took an English course, and I got a D- in speech the last time I took a speech course, and I stand here in front of you, an international renowned speaker and a six-times best-selling author. No one can tell you that your past equals your future. No one, no one, no one can tell you that your past equals your future. My future equals exactly what I desire it to equal. And so I just stopped by Kentucky to touch your soul, heart to heart, soul to soul, belly to belly, to have you think of possibility in a bigger way, a way that makes your knees knocking, your belly flipping, your teeth chatter a bit. What would you do if you knew you couldn't fail? What would you do if you already knew the victory was, in fact, yours? How would you love again? How would you forgive and give second chances a thousand times? What business would you leap into or how deep in your business would you leap today? would you be willing to risk it all to gain it all? Would you redefine what radical looks like in your life? See, I didn't come here to entertain you. I didn't even necessarily come here to keep you comfortable. You know I wish I could. You know, right? You know, right? I came here to ask you, are you willing to be unreasonable? Are you willing? Are you willing to divorce yourself from the fear of other people's perception of you? Are you willing to say, listen, my own doubt, my own fear, my own limiting beliefs, I understand why you have been in my life. I understand where you come from, but you will not fit in my breathtaking future. I've got to leave you here. I have to leave you here. I appreciate you, and I know where you've come from, but I've outgrown you. And I can't be the man, the woman that I was born to be if I try to take you with me. Are you willing? See, because they didn't think I'd be this person. because they couldn't see it and neither could I. But I was willing to be radical. I was willing that day I sat on my couch and looked down at my baby wrapped in a blue towel because I couldn't afford to buy Pampers. I was willing to say the thing I'd never said before, to do the thing I'd never done before so I can be the woman I'd always known myself to be that I hadn't even met yet. Are you willing? I just stopped by Kentucky to touch your heart, to stir your soul, to make you in some cases mildly to moderately to significantly uncomfortable in mediocrity. I don't mind. I stopped by to call you to your own breathtaking future. Waiting on you. Waiting on you. Waiting. but it ain't gonna stop by like UPS and say, here, here's your breathtaking future. Sign here, please. That ain't happening. And it's not gonna come inside comfort either. You gotta be willing to be uncomfortable. My grandma says a conviction ain't a conviction unless it costs you something, baby. Are you willing to pay a little bit? Are you willing to get a bump knee, a bruised knee, abused elbow? Are you willing to walk alone? See, some of you are walking alone because no one else gets your vision. Well, I just stopped by Kentucky to tell you that if no one else gets your vision, it's because God only gave it to you. Yes, yes. Yes, yes. It's not their vision to get. It's your vision to have. It's your vision to birth. It's your vision to give life to and then share with the world. So I just stopped by Kentucky to get heart to heart with you, to not let you escape from your greatness, and to cut down the time to get there. You got to run to it like you're late for work, because there's some other soul that's sitting in the corner in the darkness, because they're not allowing their light to fully shine. They're sitting in the darkness, and they're not going to be illuminated by their light. They're going to be illuminated by your light. When you do 159 watts for a moment, they can see a glimpse of who they can be because you gave yourself permission to let your light shine brightly. Your light doesn't belong to just you. Your light belongs to those of us whose lives it's going to save because you were willing to give yourself permission to let your light shine. Somebody going to get that on the way home. Somebody. And so I just stopped by Kentucky and I want to close with a story and I'm going to be in here for the next hour and I'm going to stay right here and I'm going to take questions and I hope that you choose to stay and have some for those of you who are interested in ways to up level your life, your professional life or your personal life, ask me, talk to me, that's what we do, that's what I do I would love, love to support you more than anything, I'd love to I get excited about the opportunity to help someone transform their life into It's something that's barely recognizable. And we do it pretty well. We do it pretty well. So if that's something that you are interested in or scared of, come to me anyway. This last story, my heart was just told when I was walking in here with Anthony, I said, I got to tell quitters never win. I got to tell quitters never win. When I was 15, I swam competition. So, you know, I've been watching the swimming. I can't watch the swimming Olympics before I go to bed because then I'm swimming in my sleep. I'm like, oh, I'm not resting. I'm competing in my sleep. And I always win. It's my dream. So I swim competition. I love swimming competition. But I have one small challenge. I would always, and I kid you not, Janet, always come in dead last. Say dead last. Dead last. No, no, say it like you said if I wasn't around. Say dead last. You know how you said if I wasn't around. Girl, she came in dead last. So I would always come in dead last. You don't know how you say it. That's how you say it, right? So if they had six lanes, I'd come in six. They had eight lanes, I'd come in eight. They had ten lanes, I'd come in ten. They once had 11 lanes, and on the back of the ribbon, they put 12. I went to the judge. I said, Judge, I didn't come in 12. He said, baby, you came in dead last. I said, but that was 11. Can you adjust that, please? My mama don't know it was 11 people. So I would always get this thing called an honorable mention. Y'all laughing because you know what an honorable mention is, huh? See, everybody laughing knows that honorable mention means thank you for showing up. You didn't do diddly squats. But we appreciate you for being here, y'all. Come back now, you hear? So I had swam 13 events that summer, so I had 13 honorable mentions. And my mother, not knowing what an honorable mention was, she put them all on the wall. My brother nicknamed it Lisa's Loser Shrine. So the last swim meet of the summer, the hardest team, they was rough in the water and out of the water. They were deep in the cut of watts, and I was really scared. So I go to my grandmother and say, Grandma, I'm tired. I'm tired of putting my all in. And I just want to hear you guys say yes, yes, if this is where you are, just be honest because we start from where we are. I'm tired of putting my all in and feeling like I'm getting nothing in return. I'm tired of showing up and no one even like acknowledging that I showed up. Grandma, I'm tired of feeling like I'm not even, I don't matter in this whole equation. I said, Grandma, I quit. I'm choosing to quit. She said, quit? I said, quit, ma'am? She said, baby, come sit here. Obviously, you don't know something. I was like, oh, she's going to try to motivate me. I was 15. She said, and I guess someone here needs to hear this, so just say yes, yes, as you self-identify. She said, baby, she said, you come from a long, long line of winners. She said, and quitters never win. And winners never quit. She said, your great, great ancestors, see, they had a hard life. They had to do a long journey, uncomfortable, and many people didn't make it, but your great ancestors did because quitters never win. And winners never quit. She said, your grandparents, see, they worked in the fields with blistering fingers and blistering toes and under the scorching heat. And they didn't send their complaining stories down to you because quitters never win. And winners never quit. Your mama, your daddy, I know you think they're crazy. I say, yes, yes. She said, but you never hear them complaining. They just provide for you and give you the best they have because quitters never win. And winners never quit. She said, so I don't know, baby, if you thought you had the option of quitting. She said, but that option ain't even on your table. Because you're from a long, long line of winners. So you might have just forgot who you were. Come on, y'all. Yes, yes. She said, so you go on out there and you swim that swimming tomorrow. And I'm going to say the same prayer. I always say, God, thank you for giving my baby the victory before she ever starts the race. I said, because I was 15. And Grandma, I know you say I won. And God say I won. But can somebody tell the judge? Because he keep giving a sister the honorable mention. The next day I went into the gym and I saw the worst sight ever. The worst. My entire family in the bleachers. They had never come to a swimming before. It's like 30 people in the bleachers. Hey, girl, how you doing? We love you. We got your bag. We're watching you. I'm like, oh my God, oh my God. Why are you guys here? Who told you? Grandmama called us. Y'all go help that baby. She needs some encouragement. So I go over to the judge. I said, Judge, my name is Lisa. I'm here from the 1516 freestyle. He said, I said, can I just get my honorable mention in advance? And I swim. He said, oh, I'm sorry, baby, you missed your heat. They already swim. I said, oh, cool. He said, wait, wait, coach, do you want her to swim with the 17, 18 year olds? We have one lane left. Oh, he threw me in a whole other lane. I was like, it's not only ease play ease play. Oh, no. I was like, please, the 15 year olds have me for lunch. I will be the appetizer for these people. My coach said, Lisa, go ahead and swim. You need the practice. I said, I don't need no practice. I know how to lose. I got a loser shrine at home. What about you? So I get on deck. The only lane that's free is the one in the middle of the pool. Y'all have to know there's a really big difference between a 15-year-old girl and an 18-year-old girl. At 15, I had on a blue bathing suit with blue lace. At 18, Speedo. At 15, I had my hair in cornrows with, yes, matching blue berets. At 18, Speedo cap. I was like, that is so not cute. At 15, I had a waterproof mascara. I really got ready with that every time I swim. At 18, goggles. I was like, that is so not cute. At 15, I get on deck. Hi, my name is Lisa. Hi. Hi, wait for me when you finish. Hi. At 18. Swimming to your mark. God. You said to have faith of a mustard seed. I think I might need a watermelon seed. Said? My grandmother said that I'm a winner. And even when I can't see it, it doesn't change the fact. Pow! I hit the water. Quitters never win. Winters never quit. Quitters never win. Y'all help me. Quitters never win. Winters never quit. Quitters never win. I drew my right arm back. There was one girl equal to me. I said, oh, today she coming in what? Dead last. Quitters never win. Winters never quit. I chanted that the whole time, you guys. Quitters never win. Winters never quit. I did the flip turn, turned around, quitters never win. Come on, y'all help me. Quitters never win, winners never quit. Quitters never win, winners never quit. I hit the wall. I looked to my left. There was no one there. I looked to my right. There was no one there. I said, dang, I'm so slow they got out the pool. I'm getting slower by the hour. There's not even any ripples in the water anymore. I look up at my coach and she's screaming hysterically, Lisa, Lisa, look, look behind you, Lisa. I'm like, what, what, look behind you. I look behind me and the first person had just hit the halfway mark. So I said, but you know our chatter, you know that consultant in your head will talk you out of anything. I said, coach, was I supposed to swim three laps? You want me to go? My coach comes home to me. She said, what did you do differently? What did you do? I've been training with you every single day this year. What did you do differently? I was like, oh, I'm curling around my hair, my hair, mascara. Oh, I chanted this thing my grandmother taught me yesterday. She goes, what? I was like, she goes, wait, wait. What did you chant? I said, quitters never win and winners never quit. She goes, what were you chanting before? I don't want to lose. I don't want to lose. I don't want to lose. I said, what happened? What happened? What happened, coach? Why are they just getting to the wall? She said today, at age 15, you just broke the 17, 18 national record in freestyle. Yes, yes. Yes, yes. Yes, yes. The only variable that changed, the only one, was the food I fed in my mind in the moment. So I just stopped by Kentucky to inspire your soul, to touch your heart, to stir your belly up. Not with who you've been, or even who you are, but with who you are becoming. Your greatest, your greatest days are sitting right out in front of you. Waiting on you to grab it. And don't you dare spend another moment dimming your light so that others won't feel insecure in your presence. Don't you dare spend another day shrinking your greatness so others won't be intimidated by your power. Don't you dare spend another moment trying to reduce your giant so you won't feel like you're too big in a room. You set your giant free. You allow your light to shine. You turn your 100-watt light up to 259 watts. And for those who cannot handle the brightness of your light, don't you dare turn your light down. Just hand them some shade. Happy, happy 10th anniversary, Minority Business Expo. Happy 10th anniversary, Minority Business Expo. Happy 10th anniversary, Minority Business Expo. We'll be right back. Get down, get down, get down, get down tonight, baby Get down, get down, get down, get down tonight, baby Get down, get down, get down, get down tonight, baby Thank you. I told you not to wander around in the dark I told you about the swans that they live in the park Then I told you about our kid, now he's married to me Yes, I told you that the light goes up and down But you notice how the wheel goes down And you'd better pick yourself up from the ground Before they come, you're cutting down Just be all that we've been covered in dark Talking about a girl that looks quite like you She didn't have the time to wait for you She cried away her life since she fell off the crate Well, since my baby left me, well, I found a new place to dwell Well, it's down at the end of Lonely Street, that heartbreak hotel Where I'll be, I'll be just so lonely, baby Well I'm so lonely I'll be so lonely I could die Oh, although it's always crowded But you still can find some room For broken hearted lovers To cry their new gloom I'll be so lonely I'll be so lonely, baby I'll be so lonely I'll be so lonely I'll make you die Now the bell of tears keep flowing The desk clerk's dressed in black Well, they've been so long, lonely street They'll never, never look back And think of something And think of something lonely, baby Well, they're so lonely Well, they're so lonely They could die Well, if you're a fabulejian You've got a tale to tell Well, just take a walk down lonely street To Heartbreak Hotel Well, you will be so lonely, baby Well, you will be lonely You will be so lonely You could die Oh, though it's always crowded You still get to find some room For broken, hearted lovers to cry It's so lonely, it's so lonely They could be, but they're so lonely They're so lonely, they could die I Was Driving Through Georgia To a one-horse town There was a party going on When I got there I heard a welcome speech From a small-town man He said, we got a hundred gallons Of sweet red wine Made from the biggest watermelon Don't find him yourself a son But obey the law If you drink, don't drive To the watermelon cross When the band started playing The watermelon queen Said let me show you something That you ain't never seen She grabbed me by the arm Said come on let's go She dipped down Spun around her nose Said don't She right back on her heels Dropped down to her knees Crawled across the floor Then she jumped back on her feet She wiggled and she jiggled Beat all you ever saw I said, this is how you do the watermelon crawl She said, we got a hundred gallons of sweet red wine Made from the biggest watermelon Don't find every self-consum, go obey the law If you drink, don't drive, do the watermelon crawl If you're ever down in Georgia round about July If you ain't in a hurry then you ought to stop by I can guarantee that you're gonna have a ball Learning how to do the watermelon crunch Well, we count a hundred gallons of sweet red wine Made from the biggest watermelon From the fire, give yourself some Put away the law If you drink, don't drive Do the watermelon crawl Do the watermelon crawl I have for you all Do the watermelon crawl Hello darkness my old friend I've come to talk with you again Because a vision softly creeping Thank you. Hi, I'm Paul Chartier. You're watching Heart of Gold. Our guests tonight are from Amache Center, Kentucky, Michael Jackson. Thank you. I call this meeting to order. The first agenda would be approval of minutes from June 14, 2012. Well, Commission members received a revised set of minutes through email earlier in the week. So I'll entertain a motion if there's no other revisions. I move that we accept the June 14th minutes as stated. Thank you. The motion has been made and seconded for approval in June 14th minutes. Please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Next on the agenda would be any postponements or withdrawals. If anyone has any, please come forward. Seeing none. Mr. Chairman, staff would direct your attention to page two of your agenda, item B under development plans. Staff has communicated with the applicant, and the applicant has expressed a wish to postpone that development plan, DP 2012-60, Sebastian Property, Unit 2, property located at 2826 Leestown Road, for two weeks until your zoning hearing. Anyone in the audience wish to speak in regards to this request for postponement? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, move postponement of DP 2012-60 for two weeks. Okay, that would be on the August 23rd meeting. Motion has been made for postponement for two weeks. Do we have a second? Second. And seconded. If there's no further discussion, please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Any other requests for withdrawals or postponements? You were late, Mr. Kaley. Did we just take care of your situation? Yes? Okay. Glad you'd come. Next on the agenda would be our consent agenda. If Mr. Sally would take us through that. Gladly, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Members of the Commission, good afternoon. Like your meeting agenda, today's consent agenda is also very short. but most of the remaining items on your agenda do qualify for consideration at this time on your consent agenda. There are four items. The first three are final development plans that are recommended for conditional approval by your subdivision committee. The first appears on page 2, item A of your meeting agenda, DP 2012-59, an amended final development plan for the Ingleside Apartments located at 1035 Red Mile Road. The next item on your consent agenda is on the next page of your meeting agenda, page 3, item C, DP 2012-61, Unit 2 of the Mayhem property. This property has addresses of 2950 and 2980 Manowar Boulevard. The next item on your meeting agenda is also on the consent agenda, page 3, item D, DP 2012-62, a final development plan for the Victory Apostolic Church, Incorporated, with property located at 1420 Greendale Road. In addition, the final item on your consent agenda appears on page 5 of your meeting agenda, item D. This is an amended final development plan for DP 2010-26, the Griffin Gate Office Park, located at 1460 Newtown Pike. That item has been requested for a one-year extension. At this time, unless a member of the Commission or a member of the audience would wish removal of one of these four items, the Commission can consider approval of these as recommended either by the staff or by your subdivision committee. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Salley. Anyone in the audience wish to hear any of these? Any commission member wish to pull one of these from the desk? Ms. Phillips. Mr. Chair, I had a question. The Griffin Gate Office Park amended? Yes. It's on page three. And it's item E. Thank you. We apologize for the typo. Also, Mr. Chair, with the approval of the commission, I'd like to see Victory Apostolic Church clap-polled so that we can take a closer look. Okay, thank you. Anyone else wish to pull any of the remaining items? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion for approval of the Ksenigen. Somebody. Mr. Chair, I move approval of the Consent Agenda as presented, excluding the Victory Apostolic Church Platt. Thank you. The motion has been made for approval with the exception of Victory Apostolic. Do we have a second? Second. The motion has been made and seconded for approval of the Consent Agenda. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. Thank you. Motion passes. In the interest of getting a member or in the audience out to another meeting, we're going to go off the agenda or out of order, I guess I should say, for a moment. And here the Victory Apostolic Church, which is on page three, item D. while the staff is setting up. Anyone else in the audience wish to speak on this plan? Seeing none, I think the reason for this was one item in particular, which was the location of the dumpster. I'll let Mr. Martin, I guess, orinate us to that, and I think he can provide us with just a very brief presentation and get to the point at hand. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. The item, the first item on your agenda is on page 3, item D, DP2012-62, Victory Apostolic Church Incorporated. No. No? There you go. You got me? Got you. Yeah, there we are. I know you can hear me even without this, but we are located out on Greentail Road just shortly before it crosses the railroad tracks, where it narrows down and crosses the railroad tracks. This property was rezoned not long ago by the Planning Commission. This is a final development plan. Here is the frontage along Greendale Road. Here's the associated parking. There's 54 spaces proposed. This is a 13,200-square-foot, two-story building. The railroad runs right back through here, and this is a very large KU transmission easement. There's also a large buffer required along this property because this is a little remnant piece of AR. are. The issue that the chairman has addressed is the dumpster location that is located up front at this spot right here. There was concern expressed that it could be relocated to the rear of the property. When this was reviewed by your technical committee, the solid waste folks didn't comment on the location, but they were concerned about this turning radius, which would have to be modified so that their truck could get in here and then back up and get out. That is always their concern, is just access to the dumpster. And they also do not approve them if they're located in easements because of conflicts. Your subdivision committee did recommend approval of this plan, subject to the 15 conditions that you see on the agenda. The first nine are standard development plan sign-offs. There were several cleanup conditions that needed to be addressed. And if the Planning Commission does deem that the dumpster should be relocated, that would be a 16th condition on this plan. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to try to answer them. Any questions for Mr. Martin? If not, we'll hear from the applicant. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, my name is Jason Banks. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. We don't have any problem moving the dumpster towards the rear of the property. We'll probably just put it at the end of the drive that's coming straight on in. The bottom right, according to the plan? Yes, sir. Okay. You're good with that then? Yes, sir. And all other conditions? Yes, sir. Okay. All right, then. Thank you. Anyone else in the audience wish to speak on this plan? Okay. Okay. I would think just adding a 16th condition to the relocation of the dumpster to the southwest corner, is that correct? Southeastern corner? Southeastern corner, yeah, that would be correct. Relocation of the dumpster southeast corner of the parking lot. You're okay with that, Mr. Banks? Okay, thank you. So any other discussion from the commission members? Seeing none, I'll close this part of it. And it doesn't seem like we have any discussion. I'll open it up for a motion. Ms. Phillips? Mr. Chair, I move approval of DP 2012-62 with the 15 conditions noted on our agenda, adding a 16th, which states relocate dumpster to southeast corner of parking lot. Okay. Thank you. Do we have a second? Motion's been made and seconded for approval with the 16 conditions. Please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Banks. The next resuming the order would be on page 1 at the bottom, 1A, Plan 2003-209P, Masterson Hills and Masterson Station. We do have a revision, which is on the blue sheet in front of you. Excuse me, Mr. Taylor. the first item on your agenda is on page one your item one preliminary subdivision plans it's item a it's playing 2003-209 p Masterson Hills and Masterson station unit 10 this is a preliminary subdivision plan for property located off of spur Road the Sandersville elementary school sits here sandersville road just above it connects into spur this is a preliminary subdivision plan for 422 lots in this area this area is part of a different preliminary subdivision plan so they are amending this portion of the property the staff and subdivision committee had recommended postponement back in April as you can see on their agenda under condition number 11 was to discuss compliance with Article 3-7B, 4 of the zoning ordinance. Oh, we can swap that for me. There's a number of conditions in Article 3 related to cemetery protection measures. In the middle of this development, there is an existing cemetery, which is governed by this ordinance. In particular, Number 4 required a cemetery boundary study to be performed and submitted with any development plan or preliminary subdivision plan, and that had not been done. The staff received the copy that's handed out to you. Received this yesterday and has reviewed it and has a revised recommendation for you at your place. The staff did not receive a revised preliminary subdivision plan to go with this report, So there are a number of conditions that have changed to document compliance with other portions of 3-7 in order to recommend approval. Starting after the sign-off and cleanup conditions, condition number 10 is to denote the 50-foot no disturbance area around the cemetery. And again, that's per 3-7B and number 1 that you see on the overhead. that does need to be denoted with an area on the plan that makes it clear that there's no grading to take place within 50 feet of the boundary of the cemetery. Condition number 11 is the submittal of the cemetery map per 3-7B4. Again, that same number 4 that requires a cemetery boundary study also requires a boundary map to give us the grave location and orientation of graves in the cemetery. And that needs to be incorporated as well into the preliminary subdivision plan. And that was not accompanied with the report that was given to us yesterday. Condition number 12 is to simply denote three other sections of 3-7 that need to be related to fencing, landscaping, screening, that regard, that need to be denoted on the plan that they will have to comply with in the field. and number 13 is a condition related to the deep lots that back up to the cemetery in this location it's a odd and we have subdivision regulations that generally dictate a ratio of frontage to depth on lots these are odd shaped lots but it's for a strange reason we would like it denoted for the purposes of the final record plats when those come in that there may be some adjustment to those lots and the depths of those lots. Again, all of that is subject to seeing the full boundaries within the map that will accompany the cemetery protection measures to tell us just how far the extent of that cemetery could change as part of this plan. But if you have any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them. Questions for Mr. Taylor? Chris, I do have one. When we're talking about denoting requirements for screening, landscaping, fencing, et cetera, on the plan, will there be an actual detailed drawing showing what is intended? Not necessarily, depending on the language of the notes that they use and how specific they are. It's possible that we may need those. Not necessarily a drawing, but there will be detailed notes? Okay, correct. Thank you. Any other questions? If not, Mr. Cayley, glad you could join us. Mr. Cayley is my name, thank you. Rory Cayley with EA Partners here on behalf of the client, and we are in agreement with the revised 13 conditions. To further answer your question, I'll take the verbiage from the ordinance and put it on the drawing itself. So it's all in the note form, so whoever's using this to go by, they can see verbatim what they have to do. Okay. Thank you, sir. Any questions for Mr. Haley? Anyone in the audience wish to speak on this plan? Okay. Thank you. I'll close this part of the hearing and open it up for any discussion and or motion. Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. Move approval of Plan 2003-209B, Masterson Hills. With revised conditions? There's a revised staff recommendation. Okay. Thank you. Motion has been made for approval of Masterson Hills and Masterson Station. Do I have a second? Second. And seconded. If there's no further discussion, please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kaley. We do have an addendum that's on a white sheet attached to your agenda. It's got two items on it. We're going to take one of the items right now. It's a zoning development plan for Red Mile mixed-use development, ZDP 2012-13. It's my understanding this is for a re-approval. Mr. Selle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, members of the Commission, good afternoon. This item is on your addendum. It's on page 5, item D. This is the item we tried to slip through on your consent agenda unsuccessfully. This is ZDP 2012-13, the zoning development plan for the Red Mile mixed-use development. This involves property at 439 through 471 Nelms Avenue and a portion of 1200 Red Mile Road. Many of you may recall the hearing the Planning Commission had on this plan in late June. The subject property at that time is at the corner of South Broadway and Red Mile Road right opposite Virginia Avenue, which extends to the east at this location. We had a lot of discussion about Nelms Avenue, which is currently a street that parallels Red Mile Road, into the greater Red Mile property in very close proximity to the existing stable of memories that is here. This development plan accompanied a zone change and was part of the much larger Red Mile mixed-use development. And at your hearing, we showed a blow-up of the property that the amendment involved. It involved retaining about half of Nelms Avenue and turning it at a 90-degree angle into an existing access stub that exists on Red Mile Road. That was for the purpose of allowing two 43,000 square foot buildings, this location and that location, new off-street parking in this area, in addition to an off-street parking lot between the racetrack and the stable of memories property that would also serve this mixed-use development. The development plan proposed non-residential use on the first floor and residential use on the second floor. In looking at the addendum, there were 11 conditions associated with the Planning Commission's approval of this plan in late June. All 11 conditions were met with this plan, and the plan was certified on July the 19th. Unfortunately, your approval was only good for two weeks, and the plan was certified three weeks after your meeting. What staff is requesting is that this plan be re-approved today so that it can be recertified within the next two weeks. Otherwise, this entire application would need to start over at scratch. Those of you on the committees may remember this item was postponed a number of months at your subdivision committee and at your zoning committee to go over this development plan. And so that is the primary reason the staff is asking you to consider a re-approval of the plan subject to the 11 conditions today. At this time, I'd be glad to answer any questions from the Commission about our request for re-approval of this plan so that it can again be recertified. Thank you, Mr. Saleh. Do we have any questions for Mr. Saleh? Anyone in the audience wish to speak on this? Thank you, Mr. Saleh. Thank you. Seeing none, if there's no questions, I'll close this part of the hearing and open it up for a motion for this re-approval. Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. Anyone that wishes to. Or a combination. I don't care. Mr. Chairman, I move for re-approval of ZDP 2012-13 with the 11 noted conditions. Motion's been made and seconded for re-approval of the Red Mile Mixed Use Development Plan ZDP 2012-13. If there's no further discussion, please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Next, I'm going to drop down, and I'll tell you what. I'll ask for a motion for approval of the performance bonds and letter of credit, the memorandum that's in front of you dated August 9, 2012. Mr. Chairman, move approval of the release and call of bonds. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. The motion has been made and seconded for approval of the release and call of bonds dated August 9, 2012. Please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Thank you. We'll drop down to the BOAR 2012-1 Michael Hayes, and we'll take that at this time. I think Ms. Rackers will get us started. Good afternoon. This is on page four of your agenda. It's item B under Commission Items. It's BOAR 2012-1, and it's a bill made by Mr. Michael Hayes. And before I get into that, I have two things that I'd like to submit into the record. Each of you has a copy at your place. One is a letter from the Bluegrass Trust for Historic Preservation in support of the staff's recommendation, and the other is a copy of Mr. Hayes' appeal. Mr. Hayes owns two properties on Oldham Avenue, both of which are in the Ellsworth Historic District. They're 354 and 358. It's these two properties right here. We've got High Street along here. Euclid Avenue is here. This is Oldham, Kentucky Avenue, and Park Avenue. The properties are zoned R1E, which is a single-family residential zone, and all of the properties, as you can see, are also zoned R1E that are in the immediate area. The property is within the downtown master plan area, but the underlying recommendation for these two properties is medium-density residential. The houses on the properties were both built in the early 1900s. One was purchased in the mid-1980s by Mr. Hayes, and I think that's the one that he lived in until 1993. And then the other one was purchased in the early 90s. Each is developed with a single-story frame cottage, and each has had significant upgrades. And that would include additions that included vital windows, but that was done prior to 1999 when the historic overlay was put on the properties. and then now both of them are used as single-family rental properties. This is a review of a BOAR decision that happened on April 11th this year. The BOAR denied a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the original wood windows with wood-clad vinyl windows, which is unusual. Usually it's the other way around. They'll be wood clad with vinyl or clad with aluminum, but these are vinyl windows that are clad with wood. each of the houses had windows replaced without a certificate of appropriateness and that was done this past year and as I said the vinyl windows that were existing prior to these windows being replaced were on the house prior to 1999 so they're basically grandfathered and they can stay but the windows that are in question are the ones that were put in this past year in his presentation to the Board of Architectural Review Mr. Hayes said he tries to provide affordable housing to people and part of that is to allow his tenants to make improvements to the property and then deduct the cost of that from the rent that they pay him. And the tenant at 354 replaced five windows with vinyl windows, and that was without consulting Mr. Hayes and without a certificate of appropriateness. And then the tenant at 358 moved, and Mr. Hayes said that was because of the high utility bills. They couldn't pay the utility bills, and so they moved out. and he cited the inefficiency of the original windows. They couldn't withstand the weather and so they moved because of that reason. So he decided to replace the windows at 358 with the same kind that were done at 354 and he based that decision on information that he received from the window contractor saying that as long as the profile and the size and everything matched what was original, then it was okay to use vinyl. That was incorrect information, unfortunately. He bought what he thought would remedy the energy efficiency problem, and he didn't get a certificate of appropriateness to do that. He didn't even consult with historic preservation to see if that was okay. He just did it. He knew the properties were H1 because he spoke in favor of the Ailsford H1 at the time it was done. In his presentation, he had several photos of the interior and the exterior, and those are included in your packet there, showing that there is little left of the original fabric of the properties in order to provide a justification to keep the vinyl. He also contended that if you put wood on the outside of the windows, attach the wood to the outside of the windows, it would make them wood windows as opposed to vinyl windows, and that would be for both practical purposes and regulatory purposes. And he also said that if the wood was on the outside, it would make the vinyl an interior element, and so therefore it wouldn't be within the board's purview. They consider exterior changes rather than interior changes to a property. And if the wood was on the outside, you wouldn't be able to see the vinyl, and so therefore it meets the intent of the design guidelines. The chair of the BOAR said that windows are part of the shell of the house, they're part of the structure, it's a structural element, and so therefore it is within their purview. And just because wood was attached to the exterior did not make the windows wood windows. There are still vinyl windows, and use of vinyl is prohibited by the design guidelines, whether it's visible or not. And Mr. Hayes didn't agree with that assessment, and he asked them to consider his request to keep the vinyl because it was difficult, if not impossible, to tell from the street that these are vinyl windows. And because the wood is on the exterior, it had made the historic visual integrity of the houses and of the historic district. and if you take that argument at face value it would say that only the appearance of properties should matter with regard to improvements in use of materials but that's not how the design guidelines are written and that's not how they're supposed to be or intended to be interpreted it specifically states in the guidelines that when replacement is allowed it has to be or it should be with in-kind materials in-kind size and in-kind design and here in this case the design and the size are still the same, but the materials are totally different, and in fact, they're prohibited. Design guideline 124B specifically states in its last sentence of the guideline that vinyl or vinyl clay windows are not allowed. And that is one of the two design guidelines that are cited in your staff report that specifically apply to this. There are several design guidelines that Historic Preservation staff cited in their presentation to the Board of Architectural Review, but this one and 124A specifically apply to this are the most applicable. A little over four years ago, the design guidelines went through an extensive review, and that was by a committee made up of the Historic Preservation Committee, Commission, I'm sorry, the Historic Preservation staff and several interested citizens. And subsequently, the design guidelines were adopted in 2008 after they were revised by the Historic Preservation Commission. And one of the major discussion items was replacement windows, and part of the reason for that was because several appeals for windows or requests for windows had been turned down by the BOAR and ended up as Planning Commission appeals. And at the time, there had been new materials that replicate historic windows and provided a good level of energy efficiency, and so they decided to consider that, and they discussed vinyl. Vinyl was decided ultimately that shouldn't be used because of aesthetic purposes, because it wasn't historically used in construction of structures, and because it hasn't withstood the test of time. But they did discuss it at length. They had input from builders. They had input from professionals in the field. And they ultimately decided that vinyls should not be permitted. We reviewed this request and based our recommendation on the staff report from historic preservation as well as the record of the hearing and couldn't see any flaw in either party's review of this or either party's decision. It's consistent with the BOARs and the staff's charge in interpreting and applying the design guidelines, and it's consistent with their past decisions regarding replacement windows. There's no room for interpretation of this guideline as there is with some. Vinyl is specifically prohibited as it states in 124B, and we are recommending disapproval and that you uphold the BOAR decision. And the three reasons are in your staff report and on your agenda. Those are basically that the denial of the certificate of appropriateness by the Board of Architectural Review is consistent with our charge in determining appropriateness and applying the design guidelines. It's also consistent with our past decisions regarding replacement windows. And although the appearance from the street would be wood windows, in fact, the material of the windows is vinyl and vinyl is prohibited, as stated in guideline 124b and then the adopted design guidelines underwent extensive review and vinyl even after all the discussion that they had vinyl is still prohibited so if you have any questions about the stack report i'd be happy to answer them and ms armstrong is here from historic preservation and mr hayes is here any questions for ms raggers don't seem to have any right now thank you thank you next we'll hear from the board of architectural review hello my name is amelia armstrong and i'm the preservation inspector for the historic Preservation Office, and I'm going to submit the record, including Article 13, the design guidelines for the record. I'll just go over some images here in the slideshow here. And to give you the idea of the streetscape, this Oldham is in the Ellsworth Historic District that has been made. It was designated in H1 and 98. and at that time all the changes that have happened to these structures were accepted at that time. I'll just note that. And then here, sort of to give you a street scape, here is looking south, and you can see the two buildings in question, two structures there, 358 and 354, which we'll hear concurrently today. And, again, just another image of front elevations of these structures. And then in February of this year, I found that the windows of the structure were being replaced, and I stopped the work at that time and discussed with the contractors their scope of work. And so the images reflect now, and at the time the windows were being replaced. and so there are six windows of this structure that were being replaced and the front two windows here. This is the time the construction had occurred and this is the front window that was being replaced at the time. And the side elevation, this is the south side. Once staff had talked with the applicant on site regarding the situation, he proposed installing, and that was part of his application when we went before the Board of Architecture Review, to install a wood frame that would fit in over top of the vinyl, including sort of a meeting rail. So his request was to replace the vinyl windows and to install this wood frame over the sashes itself. At that time, and just sort of give you a little bit more of a walkthrough, this is still the south side, the four windows. The rear has had a porch addition and also a side addition in this location, and these windows were replaced prior, and this whole addition was done prior to the historic district designation. In addition, once staff was on site, staff did notice that 354 here had also had their sashes replaced but also had their surrounds around the window clad in vinyl as well. So part of this request was also to, he had conveyed his thought that he would go ahead and unwrap the vinyl. And so that was part of his request at that time. besides replacing the vinyl sashes and then installing the wood frame around them. This is the front window to sort of walk around through. This has five windows. It's sort of an overview. You can see the two on the side, and there's three on the front. And so it also has received some additions previously as well. So when the Board of Architecture Review heard this case, they looked at Windows in particular and looked at the design principle of the design guidelines of Windows itself and also the design guidelines specifically outlining sort of the same guidelines are noted in Barb Riker's excellent report on this topic and came with the same conclusion that the vinyl was not appropriate for the structure and disapproved the case at that time. And so at this time that we were asking that you uphold the BOAR's decision and disapprove the windows in the proposal as put forth, as the BOAR had done so. And Betty Kerr and myself are here for questions. Thank you. Any questions for Ms. Armstrong or Ms. Kerr? Yes. Well, I'm sorry. I'm a little confused. Is this window, is it a wood and vinyl product, or was he just simply trimming the window out in wood? That's correct. So he had already installed the vinyl window product, so what he was proposing was to have a carpenter create a wood frame that would go over top, but really sort of act like a storm, so to speak, over top the window with no glazing in it. that would frame out the vinyl sash. Okay, so it's not a combo product. Not a combo product. It would leave the vinyl window in place and be an application adjacent to. Okay. Yes, Ms. Rochelle. Phillips. I'm sorry, Ms. Rochelle Phillips. Ms. Roch Phillips. I was thinking of Ms. Boland, Rochelle Boland. I was going to ask a question about our process. Is this a de novo hearing? Well, yes. It is. I'm sorry. It is a de novo hearing under the regulations, but you will be considering the record from the Board of Adjustment here. Other questions? If not, we'll ask for Mr. Hayes to come forward. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. How are you? Good. Name and address, please. My name is Michael Hayes. I live at 139 North Ashland Avenue. And my wife and I own the two houses in question, 354 and 358 Oldham. So we need, I also know two members of the Planning Commission, and I should probably identify that as Lynn Phillips as a neighbor, and Carter Blandon I've worked with in the past and continue some. So I don't know, and I don't want to put them in any uncomfortable positions or anything like that, but I need to let you guys know that. I'm going to go. The BOR hearing was pretty long on that, too long. So if we could go. Are you controlling the slides? Oh, I'm sorry. Can I? I'm sorry. Okay. Oh, good. Real quick, 354 old and was my former house. It was Peggy and I's former house. We bought it in 1985. We lived there until 1997. And then we moved over to North Ashland. You saw it. It's an all-asbestos house right there. It's about three. It was originally a three-room house. Now it's, I think, six or seven rooms. These were from the BOI here. So they're taking it in spring. There's the back, the side. Quick inside, that's a living room, family room. That's a kitchen. And there's one of the windows in questions. But my point is they're in excellent condition. We only charge $500 a month rent for this. It was $565, but we lowered it after it was paid off. We have always, it's not necessarily the best financial thing, we've always provided affordable, quality housing. It's never been rented to students. Right now there's a young couple in there, both professionals. He's a young entrepreneur. And part of the reason being that, the entire reason, was because there's a couple of neighbors there we really like. I know that's kind of anecdotal, but that's really the reason. 358, bought in 1994, or three. And that was really, it was being bought, being sold by a guy who was moving back to Toronto, an architect, who was the one who put the final siding on it. It was going to be bought by a property owner here that has a lot of rent to own property, or he did at the time. I don't know if that's still billable. And we just bought it. You know, we recently married, and we never meant to get in the rental business, but we didn't want a rent-to-own type thing. I'm not going to mention names, but it really was not a good situation. So we bought it. That, again, is only $500 a month, and you'll see a quick run-through of that, but it's really high-quality rental property. There's nothing really that good in that area. Again, it doesn't make any sense, but that's sort of the way we were brought up and will continue to do so. In fact, the last person there, she didn't even pay rent for eight months, but a single mother with a daughter. Finally, things went even worse for her and had to leave. But that's the property, kind of like Amelia showed you. the back. There's the side with four windows on this side. That's the inside. You can see one of the windows on the interior. And one of the bedrooms, a second bedroom. And that's a family room in the kitchen. Again, we've kept them as two bedrooms, single family rental houses. While that's not the trend in the neighborhood, and I'll show you why. The neighborhood is Boulder Man has got 33 houses on it 17 of them do no longer have any of the original fabric on the outside 2 others are brick, all aluminum trim 61% of the houses do not have the original finishes on them In fact, when I did come speak back in 98 or 9 when this was an H1 overlay the idea of the H1 overlay was to prevent these boxes big boxes that were being attached really on the other side of Euclid Avenue, the 400 block, to houses. And there was no, I can't think of what the name of it, let me look. There was no neighborhood design character zone at that time, so the H-1 ordinance was the only vehicle to do it. In this area, it's really, as I say, 64.5% are not, they're all vinyl or asbestos. siding it doesn't even qualify so it was attached to the more historic Aylesford neighborhood but this this area now I don't know if you couldn't qualify it unless you attach this to something else because it just doesn't meet the standard real quickly these pictures are just the houses you can see from the front yard again the character of the neighborhood is not what you would typically picture is an olden asbestos siding glass grass front yard vinyl siding vinyl windows and i know those windows were put in after the ordinance that's a triplex where they're allowed to park in the front yard aluminum siding vinyl doors vinyl with shingles that one's hardy board siding that's another reason well anyway i won't go into that but that's acceptable well hardy supports good, but why we don't rent to students. Final siding, chain link fence, front yard, that's straight across the street. Next door, brick, all aluminum siding in the entire house. There's the adjoining streetscape. This was taken, this is, as you can see, the next three houses to these. When we lived there, these were all family, single family homes. They all had children in them. Brenda had one daughter, the next people had two daughters, Robin Kelly Brewer had just one daughter there. As you can see, it's trash day, so it looks a little worse. It's a little biased picture. But you can see, you know, it's completely a student housing section. This house is immediately next door to 358. It was a two-bedroom house. Everything you see past that first window has been added on, and that's all in compliance with the historic overlay ordinance. There's windows on the ground, windows that don't move. But those trash cans aren't mine, by the way. Those are all the neighbors. And this is trash. They've got more in the front yard. But this is a five-bedroom converted to a five-bedroom, four-bath house. We fought the battle for a long time to try to stabilize the neighborhood. But this is in complete compliance. It was much smaller than the house. And there's the backyard of that house. everything you see was done it's okay with the H1 overlay but these are our two houses they're not so you heard from Amelia what we proposed to do and this is actually it that was made by a cabinet shop in Manchester, Kentucky they would do 11 of those and they would be actually attached to the windows really mostly the appearance is exactly the dimension the appearance of the material is exactly the same as the original windows these windows in 358 are gone they've been gone for over a year this house however this board decides this is what it's going to look like anyway new wood this wood in fact will be made by the same cabinet shop and put in and there's not anything that's going to be different. And there is a side view of it, the wood exterior profile. So what I'm asking the board is, I'm sorry, the Planning Commission, is to approve the COA. Really, in order to do this, I'm asking you to really find one interpretation of the rule or the design guidelines as opposed to the other. The design guidelines say aluminum-clad windows or wood windows are okay. These being attached, it's really almost a technicality, but they become part of the windows. Any vinyl that would be part of the window would be on the interior. The chair of the BOAR took kind of an expansive view when he said that the entire envelope is privy to BOAR review. and that the interior of the window being vinyl that is in their view, the ordinance says that nothing on the interior is part of the BOA will overview. Really the reason for this, and I'm going to ask you to take a view that's maybe not completely technical, is that, ah, I'll go back. You know, our goals really aren't that dissimilar. We've provided for 15 years very high-quality, very well-maintained, affordable rental property in this neighborhood. We've done everything to try to stabilize it. Never-ended students, always professional people. We have two really good friends that still live there. Our goals and the city's goals are not dissimilar. We're just low-density, high-quality homes. We don't mean, this isn't like we have a lot of stuff. This is our only property. It's our old house and the one next door we bought out of necessity. We're not in the rental business. I work for a community development organization. My wife's a part-time kindergarten teacher. The city really recognizes it or not, but if you look up here, all those were single-family houses. There's two more on the street for sale right now. I have it back there. One of them is advertised for six occupants, $22,000 annual income. They're not advertised as a single-family home. They're advertised as strict student housing. The other one, no driveway, anything. I mean, these are all 25-foot lots. Ours is at least a 50-foot lot. you know it's a thousand fifty dollars for a two bedroom two and a half bedroom house we're not doing that our goals and the city's goals for the area around campus are not dissimilar i'm asking you uh to assist i mean we'll assist doing this uh what's gained at 354 oldham by denying the appeal, whoops, I don't know where it is, is nothing. Those windows are long gone. This is not kind of the window you're going to get. This is the window that's going to go in there. The other ones are gone. They have to be custom made. That's the exact scale, the exact same dimension, and the exact material is the old ones. and on 358 it would be attached to the existing windows as with this what you're losing, two things one, really for any resident that live there they're going to be in lesser quality product less energy efficient, lesser quality product But it's really less maintained. In 358, the windows are still there. We just screw them back in. It's not that big a deal. This isn't about money. These things will cost us about $1,400 to get the 11 of them made. In 358, the windows are there. They just go right back in. To make five of these, it's $625 for the frame and about $75 for the glass. so it's about $1,000. We can sell those, the existing vinyl windows, for more than that. There's 11 of them. So it's not about the money. It's really about the quality of the residence, quality of the structure, and the quality of life. The other thing you lose really is a supporter of what the city's trying to accomplish around campus. We've tried at $500 a month to help stabilize this neighborhood. We don't need to do that. And, you know, if we don't win this, we need to get out of the business, and we will. That's not any sort of real threat. But it's really frustrating when you're trying to do the right thing. You know, you're trying to do the right thing, and you put up with this and that, which is acceptable. So anyway, I'm asking you to take a broad view, an expansive view of the ordinance. I know it's a little bit out of the ordinary, but it's technically, I think, because they'll be attached. It's technically correct. It's a good situation for the residents and for the neighborhood. It may not be, and it's not precedent setting because it is technically correct. No one else is going to do this. No one else is dumb enough to do this but me. Anyway, I ask for your consideration of that. Either way, it would be okay. We have an alternative if you don't do it. If you do do it, I think you get a better quality property on Oldham Avenue. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Trace. Any questions for Ms. Trace? I'm sorry. Yes, Ms. Phillips. First off, we are neighbors, but we have not talked about this. No, we have not. And Carl and I have not seen each other for a while. You were postponed from last month. Yeah. And I said something, and you said we don't want to do ex parte communication. Yeah, I meant to say that. And I already know you. We have not talked. Yeah, we have not talked, so for the record. But I did have a question. Can you describe the process of how you attach the wood? I mean, did you have a cabinetmaker in Winchester make it? I'm sorry. Yeah, Manchester. Can you describe Manchester? Can you describe that process? Sure. There it is. Those particular ones are the exact... I took the original windows down to the cabinet shop. It's called Boone Forest Products. It's in Manchester. The original, upper and lower. And they replicated the size and dimension in every way. And that's it. That's not attached right now. I just sit it up there so it looks a little off. The dimension on the top one is exactly the dimension you would get with the overlay. So it's identical to what you'd see. And that's why in the styles are all the exact same dimension. How we propose to attach them is those really vital windows underneath. We would just attach them through a sunken screw into the frame. So they become part of the, they really are part of their wood-clad windows. Like it's not the best situation, but we're in kind of a messy thing. I'm asking you to work with me, and I'll work with the city on this. That's how they would attach. And they caulked in and painted. Do you have any, I mean, when we hear about windows, we hear about R factors and energy efficiency. Yeah, the young woman that lives there, she ordered these, and she ordered with the E-glass, the argon gas, the glazing. They were kind of overdone. I don't have with me the E-factor, but like window people, they always have specials on. You know, if you do this, you'll get, we'll throw in the gas. I don't know, who knows if they ever do what that means. But not only are they way, way more efficient than anything was there, or what would go back in at 358, the noise factor is incredible. As you can see, this has turned into a straight student housing area. And the noise was always, when we lived there, even then was bad, but now you don't get any of that noise. And it's a cut-through street. It's the only street where parking is allowed on both sides over there, and it's a big cut-through street to avoid traffic lights. But you don't get the noise. So I don't have the R factor. But it's far improved. Ms. Mundy? I have a couple questions. Number one, by attaching that, are you still able to have ingress and egress in and out of those windows? Yes. And then my next question is, by attaching those and drilling into the window itself, I guess you're drilling into the frame, is that not going to prohibit that movement? No, it's no, because the window is inside the frame, and they go up and down, and there's even a screen even out there, but the window inside will go up and down. the frame is on the outside and the frame matches identically the but you're going to attach that frame to the window no frame to frame technically the window but frame to frame so the movement of the window is still free ok I don't have a anyway here can I do this we need a microphone over But, Mr. Hayes, we need to take the microphone over there. Take that cordless microphone over there. Oh, that's okay. But if you just use that, do you see how the wood is there on that? Now, I understand windows, believe me. I've worked in construction a lot in my lifetime. So I understand windows. But I also understand in attaching that, you've got to drill that frame. That frame holds that sash that slides up and down. You've got to have room for that sash to move. And I think you're going to hinder ingress and egress. Well, we'll do it. We've not attached one, but I can assure you we'll do it so we don't hinder ingress and egress. Because why would you do it if you can't open and close the windows, you know? A lot of people never open their windows. I don't have screens on my house, so it really doesn't matter to me. So a lot of people never open a window, so I understand that. But I'm thinking about a safety factor. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Oh, no, no, no. No. The whole point. The other ones, I mean, they don't have storm windows or anything. The other ones are just, and Amelia was right. She looked at them kind of briefly, but she did look at them. But she looked at them from the top. They're all stacked up. but there's a lot of them down at the bottom, not a lot, a couple of them, that are rotten out and they're held together with L. So, I mean, our windows are open all the time. I would never, you just have to trust me on this, but make it so you couldn't open and close. That's the whole point is to open and close. I have one more question. Yeah. Were you aware of the Board of Architectural Reviews regulations before you did this? Well, on 354, I didn't even know it was done. The woman that lives, no. Yes and no. Yeah. The 354, I didn't know it was even done. And so I went to the girl that lives there. Her name is Kirsten Kramer. Her father, Stan, is just former head of the Planning and Zoning Commission for Woodford County and has restored a beautiful house over on Rose Hill and for sales. And he said, no, you're allowed to do this. Of course, he was going by Woodford County's regulations. So I said, okay. And then I felt like I had about 25% hesitancy, which I wanted to believe, and 75% I said, oh, okay, he knows. And then when the window salesman came on 358, which is in February, he said, oh, no, as long as they match the exact same dimensions of what we're taking out, it's okay. And quite frankly, I wanted to believe him more than I really did. But I was backing up what Stan had said. And so I said, okay. The house had been empty for a while. It's still empty. We're just finishing up some renovation, so we're either going to sell it or have a young woman that will renovate it. So on 354, no. I didn't even know it happened until it was over. 358, I was skeptical, but I really kind of wanted to believe. And that's true answers. Other questions? Mr. Cravens? Yeah, this wood frame you've got up there. Yeah. The bottom sash, you're not attaching that to the bottom sash, right? No, it'd have to be on the sides. So the bottom sash is back behind that frame about that far. Otherwise, it wouldn't open like Ms. Mundy said. It's not, actually. The way that's built, the top sash is built thicker than the bottom, of course, which is the way it really was. But you're not attaching that frame to the bottom sash of that window? Oh, no, no, no, no. Over on the sides where it's held in. Yeah, yeah. And you can really even pre-drill it and drill it into the wood on that side. Yeah. Which would actually make more sense. But that would make far more sense. But then at that point, it's technically not part of the window. This way, it's technically part of the window. Yeah. Like I said, if you guys want to go with it, I'll do it and work with you. If you don't, you know, we're going to sell them. Thank you, Mr. Hayes. Any other questions for Mr. Hayes? Any other questions for staff or fair ladies from Board of Adjustment and Review? Yes, Mr. Cravens. Staff. My dad. For the moment. Don't go far, though. What are we going to do when some of these neighborhoods I've built become historic and they're all vinyl? Are you going to change the codes then? I mean, vinyl will become part of history. Are they going to survive that long? Yeah, they will. No, seriously. Quite longer than the wood ones. Seriously, if a neighborhood, as time passes, comes forward and part of its basic character in the architectural sense is made up of buildings clad in vinyl, then that will be reflected in that's what's to be expected to continue on and be repaired in kind and all that sort of thing. So vinyl will have become its character-defining definition, And that will be an aspect that's part of the factors of why they're recognizing it, that they're wanting whatever style it responds to or reflects of its era and those materials to be protected and continue and showcase that in the future. I did get a friendly reminder. We do have others in the audience. I didn't mean to forget. Anyone else that would like to speak in regards to this, please come forward. I apologize. That's all right. I've got plenty of people that wouldn't let me forget totally. Good afternoon. My name is Jim Dickinson. I'm appearing as the interim staff attorney for the Bluegrass Trust. And by, I guess, way of introduction of myself, I used to be a member of the Board of Architecture Review, so I sat over there, not on this side very often. And I'm also a lifelong resident of the Ellsford neighborhood Historic District and a resident of 368 Transylvania Park. Linda Carroll of the Bluegrass Trust has tendered to you a letter for your consideration, and I would like to amplify a couple points on that letter. First of all, I want to commend the staff for its professionalism and its dispassionate review of the application and for its decision and recommendation to you that you should reject Mr. Hayes' proposal and that you should affirm what the board has decided to do. Second of all, though, and I think most importantly, we cannot lose sight of the fact that this issue that you're trying now to maybe sort out a compromise was created by Mr. Hayes himself. Mr. Hayes participated in the process by which Ellsworth became a neighborhood association. He knew full well that there is a planning process that must be adhered to and observed when you're doing any kind of a structural change to a stark house. He did not do that. Second of all, we cannot lose sight of the fact that if he had filed an application, he would have then known that the first thing he needs to do is to determine whether the windows can be repaired, not replaced. Under the guidelines, the preference is for repair. You take the existing materials, you take the existing condition of the window. If they're repairable, you pull them out, you repair them, and you put them back in. You don't discard them. So instead of going through the process, he went from zero, no permit, to the ultimate end of where he destroyed the windows by taking them out. And I don't know whether they're still preserved or not, but he did not adhere to the process. Everyone else in the historic district who's ever done renovation on his own, knows full well that there is a planning commission or a war, architectural review commission, that needs to be consulted to ensure that you're doing it in conformity with the regs. For you to allow a variance from that process undermines the entire integrity of the guidelines. And that's my final point I want to make to you. There is no provision whatsoever anywhere within the guidelines for this kind of variance. Mixed in with all the shoulds in the guideline is one very blunt, what we call imperative statement. Vinyl or vinyl-clad windows are not allowed. It does not mention a hybrid. it does not mention some kind of a jury-rigged, for lack of a better word, fig leaf wood cladding over the vinyl. There is no provision for this. What he should have done was file for a certificate, consulted with the staff, repaired the windows, and replaced them. Now, I want to address briefly also Mr. Hayes' effort to do a compromise is what I said earlier. It's just a fig leaf. Furthermore, there is no provision for any kind of a hybrid-type window like this, if you will. He's also trying to say that his home should be accepted because it's not historic. The whole point of the H-1 overlay was to maintain and preserve what was left. For him to go forward and be able to destroy historic elements, such as the windows themselves, defeats the purpose of the H-1 overlay. And finally, there's what I call his sort of dire consequences argument, which is basically, and I'm going to be blunt about this, it's a blackmail argument. He's saying, well, if he forced me to go back and repair these windows, then I'm going to have to expand my house and turn it into a slum. That's blackmail. You shouldn't be allowed to do that. Do you have any questions to me? Any questions for Mr. Dickinson? Okay, I appreciate your time. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Others in the audience that would like to speak? Hold on one second. You don't have a chance. Any others in the audience? Any other questions at this point from the commission members? Yes, sir, Mr. Hayes. Briefly. Yeah. I don't know Mr. Dickinson, but he made some pretty strong statements about me personally. And there's no attempt to blackmail, and that's not me. You know, there's some things that make economic sense, but putting $800 per window in an 800-square-foot house that's appraised for 120 doesn't. But the personal characterizations, I wouldn't do that to other people, and I hope that doesn't change it because that's not who Peggy and I are. So thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hayes. I would say that I took those as general statements and not in a personal nature, but thank you. Other questions from anyone to anyone? Ms. Armstrong, Ms. Coady, do you all have any sort of rebuttal in the final moments of this? Just about five sentences. In terms of showing in the applicant's materials, I'm talking about some of the existing scenarios in the historic district. It's very difficult without going piece by piece looking at each of these properties, each of these structures to just generally say all this was allowed within the historic process. Much of that reflected things that were existing conditions at the time the historic overlay came into place. In some of his images, it is correct that one addition at the back was indeed through the process. But it's just hard, I think, for you all to have a clear sense for what really was reviewed by an H-1 overlay versus what was an existing condition at the time it came into being a district. So I would just put a little caution out there about what that may or may not tell you. One thing to keep in mind, too, I mean, the process, of course, is intended for people to get their permits in advance of doing any work, partly to assure that there's an opportunity within the charge of the process to evaluate whatever is to be affected by what's being proposed, what is the physical condition and repair needs or their state of historic materials of these buildings and so on, given that the mission of the historic district process is to protect those historic materials, if at all possible. And if they can't be retained, then to put back an appropriate replacement steered by those design guidelines, as you well know. And historic wood windows can frequently be reworked with just one bottom rail replacement. It's pretty common for that to get water damage over time. And you can help achieve your R factor. You can get within about 5% of the R factor ratios that are found with insulated glass windows and such by doing good insulation around your window frames and by installing storms. Mr. Cravens never agrees with that, and we just agree to disagree. But there's a lot of data out there reflecting such information tied to historic properties and working with them. Certainly, the area overall well qualifies to be designated a historic district. And that was established through all the ordinance prerequisites of what's necessary to put forth to meet those criteria. And the intent, of course, in the big picture is, as time moves forward, to not have further bad things happen to these areas, but indeed, to facilitate good things happening in the retention of the historic buildings, the retention of their historic elements. And it is through that permitting process and the Board of Architectural Review's work that that occurs. So we would request that you support the Board of Architectural Review's decision and overturn the appeal. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Blanton? What is the cost of replacing or repairing the windows, as you've described? What's kind of a general range of the cost of something like that? There's been a project over on Old Park Avenue that's been kind of a window at a time, working on their house, doing that. And the artisan who's been working with that, I think it's been around $600 a window to take apart the window, re-glue it as needed, put back a replacement, say, missing piece, sash bottom, that sort of thing. So I would say a ballpark figure, depending on the sizes, would be from $600 to $900. Including glass? Yes, usually the glass is retained. Well, I mean, I used to live in the 300 block of Park, and I've lived in other old houses where the windows are cracked. and frankly I lived with them because I couldn't afford to replace them. But if we're talking about really rebuilding the entire window or replacing the window. Yeah, and I'm saying repairing an existing condition. If you're thinking of to order a new window that would be a wood, similar profile, with obviously new glass, the whole unit new, but be an in-kind replacement, would you say, Amelia, about $800? And it does vary, obviously, by the dimensions. but in the ballpark of $800. Other questions? Ms. Beatty? I don't know if this question is for our planning staff or for the historic staff, but is there a, I guess, a mid-range instead of an H-1 overlay when neighborhoods are wanting to stabilize or conserve the neighborhood? the only choice they have, is it the H-1 overlay? Because it seems like we've looked at these kinds of things before and where the applicant is talking about that there have been changes to other houses either prior to or after the H-1 overlay. Is there a point where we could guide or direct neighborhoods better that, no, you're not wanting an H1 overlay so that we don't have to deal with this, but is there another level? ND1 is what comes to mind as far as that goes because it's designed to maintain neighborhood character or you could create a whole new neighborhood character for an entire new neighborhood, but it's designed to maintain neighborhood character. And it doesn't have the design guidelines. It's got standards. We've gone through that with several neighborhoods, but they come up with their own standards that they want to preserve. Meadowthorpe was a good example of that, and Chevy Chase was a good example of that. Okay. But ND1 is probably, you know, the best. And that wasn't, and Mr. Hayes had said that wasn't in effect. You know, we didn't have ND1 when Aylesford became an H1 district. Oh, okay, because that was my next question. But, you know, the Board of Architecture Review, Historic Preservation Commission, Planning Commission, Council, decided that that was a good candidate for H1. So I can't say that it would have been better ND1, but they did decide that H1 was appropriate for that neighborhood. That really answered my question because that wasn't in effect when they did this. But neighborhoods that come to the Planning Commission now for that type of thing, they are given both options or you're looking at both in order to guide them in the right direction. What we require is that they talk to historic preservation as well as consider ND1 to decide which one is better for that neighborhood. Okay. Thank you. And the only additional clarification to Ms. Racker's very good answer is that part of the difference is that the ND1 is not empowered to preserve detailed historic elements, and it's not empowered to review demolition. and there are certain things that one process is empowered to carry out that is not possible with the other and vice versa. Right, right. Other questions? If not, I'm going to close this part of the hearing and open it up for any discussion between the commission members and or motion. Discussion? No? I'm sorry, Ms. Bland? Yes, every time we have one of these, I continue to be disturbed that there's no room for common sense in this process. If the point is to preserve the character of the home, and we've got a window that no one can tell the difference, whether it's wood or vinyl, it looks very much in keeping with when the home was built, it's more energy efficient, which is something that is completely lost in this. And if we want people to preserve their historic homes, wouldn't it be better to make it as affordable as we can for them? It just flies in the face of common sense to me. And I'm so frustrated and don't know what we can do about this, but I would love some guidance. And especially when there's a house with vinyl siding and we're not going to allow vinyl windows, it just flies in the face of common sense to me. I mean, I don't think it really follows the spirit of what we're trying to do here. Other discussion? Mr. Cravens? Well, I mean, I can't believe I'm going to say this out loud, but it does say no vinyl windows and no vinyl clad windows. I mean, that's pretty plain. I mean, I don't know how we, along with the applicant, could agree to break the code, I guess, so to speak. That's what the billing inspectors tell me all the time anyway. Just because I don't like the code doesn't mean I can, and he doesn't like it doesn't mean that we can agree to break it. I mean, and that's what it says. It's pretty plain right there. And I guess what is an alternative window that he can put in there? Is it a, can you just put a one-over-one wood window? That would certainly be an option. It doesn't have to be a premium window, does it? No. No, the process is not empowered to tell you what level expenditure of money you have to make to buy that wood window. You can buy a low-end wood window or you can buy a very high-end wood window. And that's, you know, of course, with the existing situation of the historic windows being gone and not able to be evaluated, That is realistically where you're left is what do you put in its stead. Yeah, I mean, they make some inexpensive wood windows, one over one. I mean, you don't even have to get them insulated if you don't want it. No, and, you know, can choose to put a storm, not put a storm, whatever their choice is, although it would help and make their artifactors closer. But there are financial ranges to accomplish this that are not at all dissimilar from a vinyl window. Is there any kind of tax credit he can get or anything? It has to be substantial rehab. He'd have to put, there's a formula, a base level of money. You would have to invest in the specific project in order to participate in historic tax credits, and it's proportionate to the value of the property. So it would be several tens of thousands of dollars that he'd have to expend as part of a big renovation. He could get an energy tax credit, I guess, throughout the rest of this year. I think it's up for this year. Absolutely. It has to be an owner-occupier for an energy credit. So we're suggesting that he replace high-energy efficient windows with low-energy efficient wood windows. That's our good solution. Does nobody like the idea of cladding the window? And then I think we could say that the vinyl window is an interior issue and not of the purview of the... I guess I'm just saying that I don't know how we can break this code. Maybe law has some answer. I mean, we can just say, okay, let him do it, but we're going against the... We don't do it that much. Ms. Plumlee? Ms. Blanton? I'm not quite sure what the process is, but is there a way to make a motion to allow him to do the wood cladding, and then that would satisfy it because then the vinyl windows become interior and not to the purview, as long as he can demonstrate that there is no impeded egress in emergency? You're probably not going to like this answer, but it's really up to you all. The only requirements in the ordinance are that when you're deliberating that you consider the findings and the record from the Board of Architectural Review and that you apply the design guidelines. So if you want to make a motion and say you're applying the design guidelines in that way and you all vote to do that, that would be your prerogative. I mean, that is why it's in front of you all. Ms. Beatty? I do respect what Carla is saying, and I think sometimes we can lose sight of just common sense, and certainly thinking about the environment makes sense. However, I don't want us to set a precedent that we will be looking at these case by case when we have standards and criteria, and I think we have to keep that in mind, that the reason that we have the architectural review and the Board of Adjustments looking at this is because we've already set some criteria and standards. Now, I think maybe we could strongly suggest our challenge that they go back at some point and review those criteria, and they may be, they have already, and see if new materials may not be, it may not be time to integrate new materials into their standards and criteria. But at this point where we are, I don't think we want to set a precedence that, you know, we may take these case by case when it's fairly clear. If it's no vinyl, no vinyl clad, then I'm leaning strongly towards supporting the decision and hope that at some point it gets reviewed. Because I know there are a lot of new materials, and I don't think we're probably looking at just windows. I'm assuming historically there are a lot of new materials in homes. and so maybe at some point they'll get reviewed and changed. Ms. Phillips? Ms. Phillips? A couple things. These new design guidelines were adopted, what, six years ago, five years ago? Yes. Yes, go ahead. Thank you. 2008 with a further update in 2010, and one of the main purposes of doing that was to do just what Ms. Beatty was discussing, which is to weigh all the new products that are out there and look for alternatives, and a lot of that is incorporated in the existing guidelines, and it's during that study that they firmly came to the no vinyl allowed decision, incorporated with the fact that they opened the door to use of some hardy plank and other materials to accommodate some new materials that are out there. So they made a very, and it was a sizable, about a year and a half study, involved a lot of citizens and building people and architects and property owners and landlords, and you get the gist. So it's not, and that will be, it's looked at every couple of years, But that was an unusually substantive review at that time in 2008 about materials particularly. Thank you, Ms. Carr. As long as you're there, there was another point. Two commissioners alluded to the Board of Adjustment being incorporated into this process, but we serve as the Board of Adjustment in BOAR appeals, correct? And your planning staff may want to respond specifically to that, but the Board of Adjustment is not, by ordinance, part of this process. Thank you. You all are the appellant body. The third question that I would like to ask is I disagree about the precedent. The point of these applications is that it is on a case-by-case basis, and I think that we can justify our actions because of the unique circumstances associated with this particular case. But I'm also conflicted because I don't like to see folks ask for forgiveness rather than permission. But is there any way that we can, because the wood cladding is in the spirit of the ordinance, that Mr. Hayes would receive a fine or some punishment for having gone about this process in an inappropriate way? Is there a fine per day or some kind of temperament that can be? No, there is not. The only fining mechanism that is built within the process is if people refuse to get a valid permit and continue to let the violation exist, i.e. don't file an appeal in something, there are penalties that can be applied. Not that this process he's been through hasn't been punishment enough, I'm sure. But however, so they have to come into compliance. So whatever your decision reflects, the party must be compliant with. And then were that party to not comply with that decision, then there is the possibility of fines being initiated for having a violation that continues and continues. But there's not a mechanism to say you can do this, but here's a fine. Other discussion? We'll add my two cents worth, I guess, then. One, I've got to applaud what Mr. Hayes is doing in trying to come up with affordable housing for people and make it energy efficient. to me from what I saw when I visited the property I would say the windows probably were in need of repair however I did not see the old windows and no you can't tell the difference from the street but to me a window is part of the exterior of the house in building a few houses it went in when the exterior shell went up. The only way to make it part of the interior of the house would be to on the external side to close it up with external material. And then you wouldn't have a window. I applaud what he's doing. I would go that way myself, except for the fact that we're talking about an H1 overlay. And I'm sorry to say, vinyl is vinyl. And I don't necessarily agree with everything in this situation, but vinyl is vinyl. And to me, that's the way I'm willing. Other discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Ms. Blanton. I'm not quite sure how to do this, or if I have the support, but do I need to move to disapprove the BOR? What I would like to do, I'll tell you, I guess what I would like to do, is to find him in compliance because of the wood cladding. you're actually going to approve his appeal if that's okay if you're going in that direction okay thank you I would like to move to approve the appeal because the wood cladding then makes the vinyl windows not part of the exterior and not under the purview of the design guidelines I think the motion has been made to approve the appeal and allow the vinyl-clad windows. And we do have a second by Ms. Phillips. Any further discussion? I would just try and clarify and ask legal to make sure I'm correct in saying this, that this motion is for approval of the appeal to allow him to keep his vinyl-clad windows. Correct? I don't want to recharacterize what Ms. Blanton said, but I think what she was trying to do was make her motion so she would be applying and complying with the guidelines. So I don't know that it was to approve the appeal just to keep them. I think what she was trying to say was to approve the appeal by saying that cladding the vinyl windows with wood would make them, if I'm correct. She can probably tell you better than I can. So then it's my understanding a yes vote would let him do what he's proposed. That's what I was trying to get to. Thank you. Not meaning to put words in anyone's mouth. Okay. Motion's been made for approval of the appeal. If there's no further discussion, I'll ask everyone to vote when it comes up on your screen. The motion is denied, so I would entertain a second motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to... Yes, sir. Let me say also to Mr. Hayes that, frankly, I also applaud what you're trying to do, because, quite frankly, if I rode by, I wouldn't probably know the difference one way or the other. But the law is the law, and my suspicion is, again, as Ms. Phillips said, that it's one thing to get forgiveness. It's one thing to ask for permission. It seems to me that there was ample time for you to have done that. I would like to recommend that we uphold the decision of the VOA and deny the client the ability to proceed with the violent windows in accordance with the staff recommendations that have been outlined. Thank you. The motion has been made to uphold the decision to disapprove the appeal. I need a second, please. Motion's been made and seconded by Mr. Berkeley, I believe. Any further discussion? If not, please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate it. I feel like I'm doing a good chair here. I appreciate you. Thank you, sir. Anyone in need of recess for five minutes? Yes? Okay. We'll take a brief recess and return. And here Chris is already. I've been summoned to a meeting desk. Thank you. all over the agenda today. We're going to take something else out of order. We're going to go to the addendum that's on the back of your agenda down at the bottom under staff item, Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Initiation. Mr. King will take us through. Thank you for your indulgence, Chairman, for taking this matter out of order. This is a late addition that has arisen that we are going to request you to initiate a text amendment to help us clarify a very awkward situation we are encountering in the zoning ordinance, particularly involving student housing locations. And I put one picture up here, and I may put up a couple others just to kind of illustrate what we're seeing and what is happening. And I'm going to need to go and point. The picture that you see in front of us is a location in what we'll call the student housing area. the area on the left is obviously a driveway which is subject to all driveway restrictions parking restrictions and projects behind the structures you can see would have been subject to permit requirements etc the strip of paving here apparently is classified as a private sidewalk not clearly articulated in the zoning ordinance, not defined at least directly as part of the driveway, and under the Kentucky Building Codes, these types of structures or facilities are not classified structures, same as patios, and therefore they are not even shown on the permit applications. People just build them. So what we're seeing is, in a situation like that, using this kind of area to de facto circumvent the requirement that there is no parking in the front yard, no pavement. You can see that that walkway doesn't really serve its intent. Here's another more recent, as of this morning's situation, where you see the driveway to the left. You see the traditional sidewalk to the house, and you can see that a strip of concrete has been placed, although there was no car parking on there, and I guess technically their contention would be there is nothing illegal until there is a car park there. Clearly, in our opinion, that is what is being looked at here. The strip that you see here, which is attached to the driveway, clearly was subject to a permit, and a permit was granted for that, but the permit did not show this paving at all. And again, this is something that we feel that perhaps we can enforce through other means, and we will look into that, but at the very least, this is, in our opinion, a situation that is fraught with the potential of encouraging violation of the law, and we are going to work on getting some text in place that will help us in our efforts to deal with that. So we would like your approval to initiate that text amendment, and as soon as we can we'll be back with you with some proposed text. Ms. Phillips, questions? Chris, is there common ownership among all these applications? I don't know. Among all those? I don't know. I couldn't say that for sure. any other questions but i think we are seeing it in the student area in general particularly other questions no yeah we're ready for a motion then um mr chair i move that we initiate a zoning text amendment to develop new regulations to prohibit the construction of private walkways in a manner which was which would facilitate illegal vehicular parking thank you motion has been made to initiate this text amendment. Do we have a second? Second. And seconded. Any questions? Discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. We've got that. Let's vote when he comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kale. vote. We will continue out of order. We have another item, another zoning ordinance, text amendment initiation. Mr. Sally, you can walk us through this one. I would say while Mr. Sally is passing this out, I have received text from Patrick Brewer. His son did have elbow surgery today and it appears to be very successful. He is back out of surgery and back in his room and all is well at this point in time. As far as Mr. Penn, we don't know about Mr. Penn. We hope he's staying on his horse. Mr. Sally. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The last remaining item, I believe, on your agenda is on page 4, item number 4A. The staff is also asking another zoning ordinance text amendment initiation. This is one that we warned you a few weeks ago that we would be asking you about. When you considered a text amendment to revise the notification requirements for conditional use permits, we passed out a draft of a change to Article 6-4B of the zoning ordinance. This article, the ordinance, deals with zone changes and the procedures for those through the Planning Commission and the Council. The main reason the staff is asking for this text amendment, which is to increase the notification area in a typical zone change from 400 feet minimum to 500 feet minimum, is because of the recent change done for conditional use permits. As you know, on occasion, some applicants for zone changes also ask the Planning Commission for approval of a conditional use permit at the same time. This change will simplify that condition so that we don't have a notification issue midway through a rezoning process that started in month one and is proceeding to a public hearing in month two. Also, this will provide an additional level of notice for the typical zone change that is not involved with a conditional use permit. You can see the draft is just simply changing the requirement from 400 to 500 feet. I'd be glad to answer any questions from the Commission about the staff's request here. Questions for Mr. Sally? Yes, Mr. Cravens. How many more people do you anticipate you would have to notify the cost and so forth? We studied that with the text amendment for conditional use permits. It was about, I want to say I'll ask Mr. Emmons, I believe it was about a 15% increase. in both the number and then accordingly the cost. The original text amendment you looked at would have had a much higher cost. As I recall, it was about 10% or 15%, but I'll ask him to clarify because he'll remember the numbers better than I. It was actually closer to about a 20% increase. We were studying all of the conditional uses that had a 400-foot notice versus a 500-foot notice that occurred in 2011. Of course, that 20% was an average cost. If you think about the fact that you get about five to eight conditional uses a month, you had a much larger sampling to kind of direct that, to get to that average. Obviously, whenever you put a circle around a piece of property, The specific geometrics of the surrounding lots has a big impact on an individual property, on how much notice that they would have to do. So we did the best we could. We studied over, well, it was about 60 properties, 60 or more properties on that 2011 cases. And the average was about a 20% increase with the 500 foot versus 400 foot. Yeah, I guess I should have seen this coming when you did it backwards, really. You did a conditional use 500 feet first, and now you're – I should have known you were setting this up, but I didn't catch it really. Well, the other text amendment was initiated by the council. It was not one the staff asked for. Other questions? If not, I'll entertain a motion for this text amendment initiation. Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. Move disapproval of this. Do we have a second? Good attempt, but sorry. Motion is not valid due to there's no second. Do we have another motion? Mr. Chairman, I move approval. Thank you. The motion has been made and seconded for approval of this tax amendment initiation. Do we have any discussion? If not, please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Thank you. I do have one other thing. One other thing, I think we haven't left anything off the agenda. This would be under Commission Items of Resolution for a former Planning Commission member. As all of you know, Marie Copeland spent four years with us on the Planning Commission, and after four years of what I'd call heartfelt openness from her, she has developed a shyness. so we did want to recognize her for the four years of service that she did give and I would say that there probably wasn't a development plan that was presented that she did not go out and visit and look at and consider and provided, as I said, her heartfelt openness and came up with a lot of good ideas. I definitely appreciate her time that she spent here, and I definitely wish her the best. I talked to her yesterday. She's preparing for a bike ride in France, I think she said, next year for like a 50-mile bike ride, and she's currently up to 14 miles a day. So she's well on her way. But I'm not going to read it, but we do have a resolution here for her that I will take to her and present to her, which definitely recognizes her significant accomplishments and thoughts while here for the four years. So with that said, if there's nothing else, I'll entertain a motion for adjournment. Seconded? All in favor, please? Aye. Thank you.