# Urban County Council Special Meeting - Zoning Hearing - January 22, 2013 > Auto-transcribed civic record · January 22, 2013 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/2845 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/2845?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2013-01-22 - **Last revised**: July 16, 2026 - **Length**: 36,708 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 Council met on January 22, 2013, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers under the presiding leadership of Linda Gorton. During this session, the Council considered one agenda item: an ordinance to create a Historic District (H-1) Overlay Zone covering approximately 37.85 net acres (approximately 51.14 gross acres). The Council took two votes and heard five public comments during the meeting. The proposed Historic District overlay ordinance was approved. ## Attendance **Present:** Clarke, Ellinger, Ford, Gorton, Henson, Kay, Lawless, Mossotti, Myers, Scutchfield, Akers, and Beard **Absent:** Farmer, Lane, and Stinnett **Late:** None ## Votes and Decisions **Motion 1227-12: Adoption of Findings of Fact for Historic District (H-1) Overlay Zone** [timestamp: 04:47:17] The Council voted to adopt the findings of fact from the Planning Commission regarding the creation of a Historic District (H-1) Overlay Zone. The motion was made by Kay and seconded by Akers. The vote passed by roll call with 11 ayes and 1 nay. Voting in favor: Clarke, Ellinger, Ford, Gorton, Henson, Kay, Lawless, Mossotti, Myers, Akers, and Beard Voting against: Scutchfield **Motion 1227-12: Approval of Ordinance Creating Historic District (H-1) Overlay Zone** [timestamp: 04:48:21] The Council voted to approve an ordinance creating a Historic District (H-1) Overlay Zone for approximately 37.85 net acres in Council District 5. The motion was made by Kay and seconded by Ford. The vote passed by roll call with 11 ayes and 1 nay. Voting in favor: Clarke, Ellinger, Ford, Gorton, Henson, Kay, Lawless, Mossotti, Myers, Akers, and Beard Voting against: Scutchfield ## Public Comment Five residents spoke during the public comment period, offering both support for and opposition to the H-1 overlay designation. **Support for the Overlay** Tony Chamblin, president of the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association, spoke in favor of the H-1 overlay [timestamp: 00:49:29]. He emphasized the need to protect the neighborhood's historic and architectural integrity, citing a recent teardown and the threat of commercial development. Chamblin highlighted strong community support for the designation and noted economic benefits from prior H-1 designations. David Berg, a long-time resident of South Ashland Avenue, shared his personal experience with the 1989 H-1 overlay [timestamp: 01:08:37]. He described how the designation saved his street from deterioration and transformed it into a vibrant, well-maintained neighborhood, underscoring the long-term benefits of historic preservation. **Opposition to the Overlay** David Minko opposed the H-1 overlay, raising concerns about the voting process [timestamp: 03:06:08]. He cited a low response rate and late postcards that he argued skewed results. Minko called for a new, unbiased survey and expressed concern that the process excluded residents who opposed the overlay. Jim Van Meter criticized the proposed boundary of the overlay [timestamp: 03:12:18]. He argued that splitting Ashland Park in half undermines the historical and architectural integrity of the Olmsted-designed layout, particularly the central medians and green spaces. Keith White, a resident of Slashes Road, claimed that his neighborhood was coerced into the H-1 overlay without proper notice or opportunity to participate [timestamp: 03:18:19]. He characterized the process as a "railroading" that violated democratic principles. ## Contested Items The January 22, 2013 meeting featured three significant areas of disagreement among council members and citizens. **Boundary of H-1 Overlay Zone** Council members and citizens debated the proposed boundary of the H-1 overlay zone, with particular contention over whether the boundary was arbitrary. Specific concerns included the exclusion of areas south of Slashes Road and the inclusion of Hanover Towers. Opponents argued that Hanover Towers did not fit the historic character of the neighborhood and questioned the logic behind these boundary decisions. **Voting Process and Notification** A procedural dispute arose regarding the validity of the postcard survey used to gauge community support. Opponents challenged the survey's legitimacy on multiple grounds: late submissions were accepted, certified mail notification was not used, and Hanover Towers residents were included in the survey despite questions about their inclusion in the overlay zone itself. Critics argued these factors created bias and lacked transparency in the decision-making process. **Property Rights vs. Historic Preservation** A heated discussion emerged between those prioritizing individual property rights and those supporting historic preservation. Speakers including Frank Harris and Jenny Saville argued that H-1 zoning constitutes an infringement on individual property rights and represents government overreach. In contrast, supporters of the overlay zone emphasized the long-term community benefits and the importance of protecting the neighborhood's historic character. This fundamental disagreement reflected differing philosophies about the balance between private property interests and community preservation goals. ## An Ordinance creating a Historic District (H-1) Overlay Zone for approximately 37.85 net (approximately 51.14 gross) acres [timestamp: 00:02:17] The council considered an ordinance to establish an H-1 historic district overlay zone covering approximately 37.85 net acres (51.14 gross acres) in Council District 5. The proposed overlay zone would apply to properties along Desha Road, Fincastle Road, Fontaine Road, South Hanover Avenue, East High Street, Richmond Road, and Slashes Road. **Support and Recommendations** The Planning Commission and the Board of Architectural Review both supported the ordinance, providing findings of fact that formed the basis for council consideration. **Public Testimony** The council heard extensive public testimony from both proponents and opponents of the historic district designation. Key speakers included Bill Sallee, Randy Shipp, Fred "Bo" Fugazzi, Stephen Vicroy, Tony Chamblin, David Minko, and Jim Van Meter, who presented various perspectives on the proposal. **Council Action** The council approved the ordinance after adopting the Planning Commission's findings of fact. This action established the H-1 overlay zone for the specified properties in the district. --- ## Decisions - **1227-12** — passed (11-1): Adoption of findings of fact for approval from the Planning Commission regarding the creation of a Historic District (H-1) Overlay Zone - **1227-12** — passed (11-1): Approval of Ordinance creating a Historic District (H-1) Overlay Zone for approximately 37.85 net acres in Council District 5 --- ## Full transcript Music Music Music Music Music Music Music And today is January the 22nd, 2013 and we have a quorum of the Council to have the public hearing of the historic district overlay zone for the Ashland Park area. And I am going to start out by going through a whole bunch of rules. If you'll indulge me, please, because this is a legal hearing and we need to follow the rules. So, and some of these I'll just go ahead and read. Vice Mayor. Yes. First, we probably need to do the roll call first. Yes. First, we are going to have the roll call. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Clark. Here. Mr. Ellinger. Here. Mr. Farmer. Mr. Ford. Here. Ms. Gorton. Here. Ms. Henson. Here. Mr. Kay. Here. Mr. Lane. Ms. Lawless. Here. Ms. Mazzotti. Here. Mr. Myers. Here. Mrs. Scutchfield. Here. Mr. Stennett. Ms. Akers. Here. And Mr. Beard. Present. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm relying on our attorneys, our council clerk, to keep me in line. Okay. Okay, and first things first, I'll ask the clerk to give a second reading to the zone change ordinance. Ordinance number one, an ordinance creating a historic district H1 overlay zone for approximately 37.85 net, approximately 51.14 gross acres for properties located at 106 through 346 Deshay Road, 977 through 1024 Pencastle Road, 1003 through 1058 Fontaine Road, 100 through 314 South Hanover Avenue, 807, 853, and 859 East High Street, 908, 912, and 1000 Richmond Road, and 1003-1015 Slashes Road, Council District 5. Thank you. And Council Member Kay has a motion. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I move to amend the title of Ordinance No. 1 under second reading of ordinances on the docket to include, quote, Urban County Planning Commission, end quote, immediately before, quote, Council District 5, end quote. This is not a material change and will not require a new first reading of the ordinance. Do I hear a second? Seconded. Seconded by Council Member Massadi. Are there any questions about the motion? It was requested by our law department, and if there's no discussion, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Second. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Now for the rules. Yes, Council Clerk. I will need to give that a new second reading. Oh, yes, you will. Sorry. Thank you. New second reading as amended. An ordinance, number one, an ordinance creating a historic District H1 overlay zone for approximately 37.85 net, approximately 51.14 gross acres for properties located at 106 through 346 Deshay Road, 977 through 1024 Femcastle Road, 1003 through 1058 Fontaine Road, 100 through 314 South Hanover Avenue, 807, 853 and 859 East High Street, 908, 912 and 1000 Richmond Road, and 1003 through 1015 Slashes Road, Urban County Planning Commission, Council District 5. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now, here is how we will proceed, and I'll ask Law or the clerk to jump in any time they need to. I will announce the beginning of the hearing and swear in all witnesses. And witnesses are anyone who's going to come to the podium and speak. At the beginning of the public hearing, we will have the presiding officer, myself, has the power to make evidentiary decision to exclude irrelevant or repetitious testimony from the record. Council members are welcome to tell me if they think testimony is irrelevant or repetitious so that I can go ahead and issue an evidentiary ruling to exclude that testimony. So in other words, in lay language, please don't repeat what other people have said or irrelevant information, and I'll trust my colleagues to let me know if you think it is. Now, I believe we have two attorneys. The petitioner's attorney, can you identify yourself? Bo Fugazi. And Mr. Fugazi, and then we have an opponent's attorney, Stephen Vickroy, and they will each submit a witness list, if they have one, at the beginning of their presentations. Your Honor, I actually only represent a couple of objectives, so in respect of that, I will have a witness list. Okay. I know there are numerous people here to speak also. Okay, thank you. Then, anyone who's speaking in favor of the zone change will submit printed materials to the clerk over here to be admitted into the record. and likewise anyone who is speaking against the issue at the beginning of the presentation, just give your printed materials to the clerk and they'll be entered into the record. Every witness will be subject to cross-examination at the conclusion of testimony, followed by the opportunity to redirect questioning. so anybody who is a witness must stay through the entire proceeding in case you're going to be questioned later on. All persons speaking need to say your name and address for the record at the podium and all documents considered shall be marked and numbered. That will be up to our clerk. and then we have a presentation by our planning division and a presentation by our division of historic preservation. Then we will have the petitioner's presentation and the opponent, the attorney who's for some of the opponents. and the attorneys have agreed to limit their speaking to 35 minutes each. Is that correct? I thought it was three, but that's correct. Well, if you're representing either the petitioner or opponents, 35 minutes is adequate. Okay. So, counsel, is that adequate? So, counsel, I'll need for you to vote on that if I could have a motion. a second to limit the petitioner and the opponent. This is just their presentations. Yes, we can do it for any amount that the council wants. They've just agreed that they could stay within that limit. Council Member Kaye? So I think you just clarified, but to be absolutely clear, what that means is the attorneys will have that amount of time, and then other people from either side will also have time to speak. Thank you. Vice Mayor Gordon, what do you envision from the attorneys, what would be an adequate amount of time to present your case? I don't want to. I do want to speak. I didn't intend to take that kind of time. I'd like to make about three or four minutes' worth of introduction. I have eight or nine witnesses who know they're limited to three minutes, and I think the 35 minutes would cover probably what we want to do, maybe 40. I would say 15 minutes would be appropriate. Is that a motion? I'm obviously asked. Oh. Can you come to the podium? Can you come to the podium because you're not being heard at all on the GTV3. I'm sorry, Mr. Bickroy. That's quite all right. I really only anticipate approximately 10 minutes. I think that's what I told Tracy originally. But somebody had come up with a 35-minute. Okay. But I really don't. So if 15 is what's your... Do you have a motion? I would accept that, 15. Okay, thank you. You move. Council Member Massadi has moved to limit each of these gentlemen's presentations to 15 minutes. Do I have a second? Second. We have lots of seconds. Let's see. Council Member Clark can be the official second. And is there any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? So the council clerk, I think, will be our timekeeper, correct? Now, individual person speaking will be limited to three minutes each. So it's better to clear the air on all the rules first, right? So we all know what we're doing. Now, I will ask law. There will be a point in here after we've rolled through each side and all the testimony where I will close the hearing. And that means no one from the public may speak any longer. It will just be up to counsel. And so I'm looking at our attorney. Is there anything else I need to do? I need to go through the order of proof. No, ma'am, I don't think so. You may just want to reiterate that if you're going to take the individuals off of the if there is a sign up sheet, that that's what you were talking about was limited to the three minutes. OK, I have no sign up sheet, so that means no one wants to speak. Correct. Monday, do I have a sign up sheet? Okay. Now, the motion on the floor is to limit the discussion to 15 minutes. We already voted on that. We voted on that. Voice vote. Vice Mayor. Yes, Council Member Henson. At the last hearing we had, the mayor presided. He swore in the witnesses. Everybody's going to get sworn in here in just a minute. I just wanted to thank you. Any other questions before I move ahead? Okay. We have lots of people who are going to speak. All right. I think this is the point then where I need to swear folks in. And we'll get on with our hearing. So if you are planning to speak at the podium, will you please stand up and raise your right hand. Do you swear that everything you say tonight is the truth and nothing but the truth? Yes. All right. Thank you very much. Now, if you're not sworn in yet and you decide later you want to speak, I'll need to swear you in. Just let me know at the podium. Okay. First, I'll ask our planning folks, represented by Bill Salley, to make their presentation. Thank you. Planning Commission's recommendation to you for this H-1 overlay zone historic district. As is necessary at the start of your public hearings, I need to enter a number of items into the record for tonight's hearing, the first of which is the legal notice that was published in the local newspaper advertising tonight's hearing. The next is an affidavit signed by myself regarding the zoning change signs that were were posted in the vicinity of the subject property. Here is a sample of one that we posted. In addition to the zone change signs, a number of mailed letters were sent to property owners in the proposed local historic district, secondly to properties within 500 feet of this proposed historic district, and finally to the two neighborhood associations that are registered with the Division of Planning. that are in closest proximity to the area of this zone change. Again, another affidavit regarding those mailings. I need to enter into the record the recommendation from the Urban County Planning Commission on this zone change. It is from their October 25th public hearing, and copies of this have been placed at the Council's stations prior to the hearing. I need to enter into the record a copy of the 2007 comprehensive plan and in addition the 2012 goals and objectives that have been adopted by the Urban County Council and by the Planning Commission. I'd like to enter a copy of the zoning ordinance and the land subdivision regulations that are in effect for the Urban County. Because this involves a local historic district, there are two additional items that need to be entered in the record. The first is the designation report for the Ashland Park Historic District. This has been prepared by our Division of Historic Preservation, and you will have a presentation on this later in the hearing. Also, a copy of the local historic district and landmark design guidelines that have been adopted and are in use here locally. You need to enter in copies of the correspondence that the Division of Planning has received. We've received 15 communications. These also copies have been placed at each of your stations along with the Planning Commission's report, and we are going to enter into the record the originals. Then the final item is a PowerPoint presentation that I will have this evening on this own change. I'd like to begin by orienting the council to the location of the zone change and the H1 overlay zone that you're being asked to consider this evening. It is in the vicinity of Richmond Road, South Ashland Avenue, and East High Street, It includes some properties along the Richmond Road and East High Street frontage. It includes all of the properties along South Hanover, between those two streets, and along Deshea Road, between Richmond Road and Fontaine Road. The number of properties from 1047 and 1058 back to 1003 are included in this zone change area. It also includes property on Ghent Road, a few properties on Slashes Road, and some on Fincastle Road as well. All in all, about 175 properties encompass this zone change. It also includes the Hanover Towers at the corner of Richmond Road and South Hanover. The existing zoning in this area is not proposed to change with this zone change. The existing zoning is almost entirely R2, which is a two-family residential zone. There are a few properties that have R3 zoning along East High Street and South Hanover, also along the Richmond Road area here. In addition, there is one R4 property very near the corner of Fontaine and East High Street, and there is one property with a neighborhood business zone, which is the westernmost corner of this proposed historic district. The zoning in the area has these same designations. There's B1 zoning along East High Street, R2 zoning along South Ashland Avenue, R3 zoning along the Richmond Road corridor in this vicinity, and also Irvin Road, McDowell Road, R2 zoning in this area. There is already H-1 overlay zoning in place in this general area, immediately to the north and west of the subject property, South Ashland Avenue, Central Avenue, Clay Avenue, and other properties further to the northwest that are part of the Aylesford Local Historic District. Here's the same area that I covered using the zoning map, showing that portions of Fontaine, Slashes, and Fincastle are in this proposed historic district, and the entireties of Deshaies and South Hanover are as well. A few properties, as I mentioned, on the left-hand side of the drawing are on East High Street and on the upper right properties along this side of Richmond Road from the Hanover Towers back in the direction of Irvin Road are also in this proposed local historic district. This is the same zoning map that is to my left and indicates the existing zoning in the area. The H-1 zone, if approved, will overlay all of these existing zones, and it will subject these properties to a design review process should they want to engage in major exterior changes to the property that can even include landscaping and paving and other exterior changes to their individual properties. The proposed historic district was studied by the historic preservation, and a public hearing was held by the Board of Architectural Review. The study area is part of a larger National Register Historic District known as the Ashland Park Historic District, which was created in 1986. The National Register District is much larger than the proposed H-1 overlay zone. It includes properties on these streets that you see listed, Irvin, McDowell, Sycamore, Woods Point, and Catalpa. It includes properties across Richmond Road and the Henry Clay Estate. The one property that is proposed to be in this local historic district that is not in the National Register District is the Hanover Towers property at the corner of South Hanover and Richmond Road. Here is a map of that local historic district. At the very top, you can see the Hanover Tower property, which is the notch in the red line. It includes properties on Fincastle much farther out as well. It includes a much larger area. The area before you this evening for the H-1 zoning is in the center-left portion of this National Register Historic District. Generally, this is an area that was developed in the 1920s and 30s, and as you can see, includes a multitude of architectural styles. Almost all of the properties are residential in character, although there is a variety in the number and types of dwelling units in this particular area. And as I mentioned already, most of the properties are R2 zoned, two-family residential, which allows duplexes and single-family residential uses, but a few properties have R3, which is planned neighborhood residential, and R4, high-density apartment zoning, as well. The 2007 comprehensive plan is located to my left, and it is on the overhead as well. The proposed H-1 area is shown in the blue line on this plan and encompasses the area between Richmond Road and East High Street in the area I've been discussing. The comprehensive plan has a variety of land use recommendations for this area, mostly, though, recommending low-density residential development, defined as up to five units per acre. that is pretty much the existing condition in that particular area. There is an area recommended for medium-density residential in the Fontaine and Deshaies and East High Street area. There is a portion of the neighborhood that is in a high-density recommended area, along Richmond Road and along the northern part of Deshaies. And also the comprehensive plan recognizes Hanover Towers with a recommendation for very high-density residential land use at that location. Finally, the plan also identifies the unique landscaping and islands along South Hanover and recognizes those and recommends those to remain and to continue as identified green spaces. In reviewing the 2007 comprehensive plan, the planning staff found that there were a number of goals and objectives that were furthered by this proposed change implementing an H-1 overlay. The three are shown on the screen here. In addition, there were several objectives associated with each of those goals and objectives that were also identified in the designation report that was prepared by the Division of Historic Preservation. In addition, the 2012 comprehensive plan goals and objectives have two themes that are furthered by this proposed H-1 overlay. That would be to recommend growing successful neighborhoods, and secondly to improving a desirable community. This zone change, because it involves an H-1 overlay, has been reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review earlier, or I should say last year. The planning staff, upon reviewing this application, recommended approval of it in its entirety. the zoning committee of the planning commission which is about half of its membership met and reviewed this application in early October and did not recommend approval of this application they recommended disapproval of it to the entire planning commission the planning staff mailed out postcards to residents of the area before the planning commission initiated this zone change and we totaled those responses back to the planning commission prior to their initiation of the zone change in May. We received a few others after that action, and we reported on all of our postcard receipts to them at their public hearing. The Planning Commission held their hearing later in October of last year, heard not only from the planning staff, but also from the Historic Preservation Office and from representatives of the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association. In addition, the hearing was very well attended, as is tonight's hearing, with citizens and residents both in support and in opposition to this proposed H-1 overlay zone. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission's public hearing, they voted 7 to 4 to recommend approval of this H-1 overlay zone to the Urban County Council. And that is summarized in the recommendation and final report from the Planning Commission. As is their custom and their requirement, the Planning Commission has forwarded findings of fact for the Council to consider. These appear on the first two pages of the Commission's final report and recommendation. Firstly, the Commission found, as did the planning staff in our staff report, that the proposed H-1 zoning for this area is consistent with two themes, goals, and objectives of the 2012 comprehensive plan. as well as the 2007 Comprehensive Plan as it relates to historic preservation. Secondly, they found that H-1 zoning for this area would be consistent with the review of the Board of Architectural Review and the Ashland Park Historic District Designation Report and Article 13-3 of the zoning ordinance. specifically the planning commission also made additional findings that you can see under that the area is cohesive and it's a cohesive concentration of architecture the structures within the study area are of several popular architectural styles from its development period the level of integrity is high throughout the study area the study area is illustrative still today of the signature Olmstead development plan from the early 20th century. The study area was listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and most importantly, the study area meets five of the nine criteria established by Article 13.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Those criteria are identified in the Planning Commission's findings as well. That concludes my prepared remarks, Vice Mayor. Thank you very much. And, of course, I will be available for questions later in the evening. Thank you very much, Mr. Saleh. Thank you. And then next up we'll hear from Historic Preservation, which I believe is Mr. Randy Shipp. Welcome. Vice Mayor Gordon, members of the Council, due to a recent back injury and ongoing problems, with your understanding, I will present from this location, if that's all right. That's fine. Thank you. When the request for designation was initiated, the Division of Historic Preservation, as charged by the Zoning Ordinance, conducted a study of this area. Obviously, with an area such as this so rich in history and architectural significance, it is only possible to give a brief overview. The study reflects the area's development and its relationship to Lexington and its cultural, architectural, and economic heritage. Copies of the report have been provided to the Council members. The area proposed for the H-1 overlay designation has been recognized on the national level with its inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The area of the proposed local designation is a portion of the Ashland Park Historic District, which was listed in March of 1986. Historic zoning is designed to protect and preserve structures and sites of historic, cultural, and architectural importance in Lexington and Fayette County. The design review process brings with it a review and permitting process for projects that affect the exterior of property and the site. Ordinary maintenance and repairs that are not subject to review process, nor does interior work that does not affect the exterior of the property, require the review process. Also, having property in an area protected by an H-1 overlay does not require the property owner to make improvements. Work that does require a permit or a certificate of appropriateness, as it is referred to, must submit plans for the review and approval. The design guidelines form the basis for review of each application and help ensure that the exterior changes are compatible with the structure, the site, and the district. The Board of Architectural Review has mandated to their staff, the Division of Historic Preservation, the review and issuance of permits for routine items such as re-roofing or substantial renovation. Other proposed work is reviewed by the BOAR. Annually, approximately 65% of all applications are reviewed and permits issued by the staff. The remaining 35% being reviewed by the Board. The boundaries of a historic district establish an area where exterior changes are reviewed before their implementation. In determining boundaries, careful consideration should be given to all properties within the area as initiated. Historic districts should include whole properties and an uninterrupted sequence of properties with a logical, well-defined perimeter boundary. If properties are omitted from the middle or along the edges of a proposed district, the character of the proposed district is only partially protected and it is not as visually cohesive. In addition, the positive effects of this protection are potentially greatly diminished. Historic district boundaries are defined by several different factors. These factors include not only the historic sites and architectural and character-defining resources present, but also the overall history and the development pattern of the proposed area. Article 13 of the Urban County Zoning Ordinance states that an area considered for historic zoning must meet at least one of the nine criteria. These criteria are included in the study that you have before you, and the ones directly relating to the proposed area will be more fully discussed later in this presentation. As Mr. Salley has already stated, both the current comprehensive plan for Lexington and Fayette County and the adopted goals and objectives that will frame the forthcoming update encourage the protection and encourage enhancement of the existing neighborhoods. Included in these are goals and objectives that relate to this application. A couple of these include protect and preserve Fayette County's significant historic and cultural heritage, implement neighborhood protection overlay zoning provisions as a tool for establishing stability and protection in existing and especially older neighborhoods. The proposed historic district was developed on a portion of a farm rich in history. Throughout much of his life, statesman Henry Clay loved and improved his estate until his death in 1852. The farm remained into the family until shortly after the Civil War. At that time, it was purchased and became the campus of the Kentucky Agriculture and Mechanical College, predecessor to today's University of Kentucky. The Clay family reacquired the farm in the 1880s. At the turn of the last century, Judge Henry Clay McDowell began planning the subdivision of approximately 95 acres of this farm. In 1908, Judge McDowell hired the firm of Olmstead Brothers of Brookline, Massachusetts, to prepare plans for the development. Internationally known for their landscape architecture work, some of their projects include Central Park, Biltmore Estate, the Kentucky Capitol Grounds as well as several projects here in Lexington. The Olmstead's archives indicate that they generated as many as 28 drawings related to the subdivision of Ashland Park. The Olmstead brothers laid out the streets in gentle curving patterns with numerous significant landscaping features such as well-planted medians and green spaces for which they are well known. As can be seen on the final plan and looking at the area today, the design was closely implemented to what was originally envisioned with medians, green spaces, trees, and housing lots with uniform building setbacks. In 1919, McDowell sold the 95 acres to a syndicate of Lexington businessmen who began development of the land in earnest. Two plats were filed, one in 1919, the second in 1922, defining the development pattern we see today. By 1923, all the streets within the study area were in place, with residences having been built on many of the lots. By 1934, houses had been built on approximately 94% of all the available lots. The remaining lots were developed by the mid-1950s. The historic houses in the study area are remarkably intact, retaining their rich architectural character that reflects almost a pattern book sample of successful architectural styles of the era. As time has passed, there have certainly been additions built, porches altered, and other changes made. However, the overall character and integrity of the area is intact and quite significant with the changes over time being part of the evolutionary history. Several prominent Lexington architects designed houses within the area. These include William H. Churchill, the firm of Frankel and Curtis, and John V. Moore. The study area is a rich blending of architectural styles that were popular during the development period. These include Colonial Revival, Craftsman, Bungalow, American Foursquare, Tudor Revival, Dutch colonial revival Italian renaissance French eclectic International and now an example of new construction taking place. As Mr. Salier explained earlier, based on this report, six findings were arrived at. The first five address the development and architectural history of the study area. The sixth finding relates to the criteria to be considered for designation as contained in Article 13, Section 13.3.G of the Urban County Zoning Ordinance. Of the nine criteria listed, the proposed overlay zoning area meets five of these criteria. Criteria 13-3G3, it is identified with a person or persons or famous entity who significantly contributed to the development of the county, the state, or the nation. The development was built on land that was part of statesman Henry Clay's farm, which stayed in the family for several generations. The Olmstead brothers were hired to develop this part of the farm into a carefully designed residential area. Criteria 13-3 G.4. It is identified as the work of a master builder, designer, or architect whose individual work has influenced the development of the county, state, or nation. The Olmstead Brothers Kerbalanary Street Plan, with landscape medians and street trees, is a signature of this beautiful early 20th century development and continues to be a significant part of Lexington today. In addition, several locally prominent architects left their imprint on the study area. Criteria 13-3G6 It has distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style valuable for the study of a period, method of construction, or use of indigenous materials. The early 20th century saw the introduction of new and innovative architectural styles that were popular across the United States. As previously mentioned, excellent examples of these national styles are dispersed throughout the study area. Though the styles of residential architecture are varied, the shared setbacks, and the unifying landscape create a cohesive community that is aesthetically pleasing and are excellent examples of the era. Finally, Criteria 13-3G7. It has character as a geographically definable area possessing a significant concentration of buildings or structures united by past events or by its plan or physical development. Similar to this is criteria 13-3G8. It has character as an established and geographically definable residential neighborhood, agricultural area, or business district united by culture, architectural style, a physical plan, and development. The study area includes approximately one half of the development plan designed for Ashland Park by the Olmstead brothers. The north, west, and south boundaries of the study area exactly match the boundaries of the historic Ashland Farm, the 1908 Olmstead Plan, and the development plats of 1919 and 1922, with the exception of 807 East High Street, which was originally part of the Woodland Subdivision. The area is linked by the relatively short development period, building methods, and materials and the use of popular national architectural styles. In addition, it is unified by a successful curvilinear street plan with landscape medians, street trees, and building setbacks set forth by Olmsteads over 100 years ago and still intact today. Thank you for your time and attention, and I'll be glad to answer questions at any time. Thank you very much, Mr. Shipp. Council members, I'm going to go ahead and go to the two attorneys, and then we'll have an opportunity for questions. First up, Mr. Fugazi, for the petitioner. And you did say you have a witness list. Okay, now is this something that, do you have a copy for the clerk? Okay. Do you want a copy, Tracy? Do you want a copy? And I'll ask our council clerk if she'll go ahead and set the time clock, please. I think the council voted on 15 minutes. Thank you. Vice Mayor and members of the Council, my name is Bo Fugazi. My real name is Fred Fugazi, and it always puts me in a state of apoplexy when lawyers are asked to be sworn in in front of the Council to tell the truth. I think in the history of mankind that's probably been frowned on as being probably an impossibility. How can you tell when a lawyer is lying when his lips are moving? Have you heard that one? I can tell you unequivocally and truthfully that I've lived in Lexington 65 years, and I can tell you unequivocally that I have lived for 20 of my first 25 years at 274 South Hanover, and I can tell you that there are three other Freds buried out on West Main Street. Now, after that, you have to sift opinion from fact. My purpose here tonight was to represent the Neighborhood Association and help focus your attention on a couple of things. And so in doing that, I prepared or had prepared for you a packet. And that packet is designed to assist you in looking at some matters. You don't have to do it right now. But in those things that I thought may be of importance to you, as we came through these various hearings, there was a question that arose about the expense of replacing tile roofs in this neighborhood because that in part is a unique feature of some of these homes. And there was also a concern raised about replacing casement windows and wood sash, wood frame windows. And so in your packet, you will find two opinions from the Board of Architectural Review where the roof requirements were modified to allow asphalt roofing because of the expense involved. And you will also find in your packet that there is the criteria and classification for replacing windows. And basically that boils down to if you're a good steward with your home, it's not a problem at all. But if your windows have deteriorated to the point where they have been destroyed, then you can replace them with aluminum windows. There's a word for it that's in there, but they're the kind of windows I have on my house. I wanted you to have those. I also put in that packet for you the summary of the H-1 permit reports for the last several years, which shows you how relatively less restrictive this process is. And I've put in your packet a little summary on what the H-1 district requires, all to try to show you that these restrictions are not oppressive, nor are they onerous. There's certainly a restriction, there's no question about that, and a limitation of personal liberties, but one that I think is balanced very fairly with the benefit that's retained. We put some affidavits in there that will summarize some depositions about the notice provisions that the neighborhood went through in the response. Some 70 to 75 percent of the landowners were positive. We put an affidavit in there about the fair cash value from the assessor's office as to how the values rose over in the South Ashland neighborhood H1 district since it's passed to show you that this may be an economic benefit to the community. I've given a list of witnesses to the Vice Mayor, and I can let her call them in order. I'd like you to hear from the President of the Association as to why they wanted to do this. Wanda Jaquith did some research on the voting, and Bob Sessom is here from Hanover Towers. There's a number of people that live there that have made a substantial investment in how they feel about this. David Atkinson with the State Chamber of Commerce and also a resident would like to address you. David Berg lives in the Ashland Avenue H-1 district, and he would share with you the benefits that he's enjoyed. Ann Kamek will tell you about the increase in economic values of the properties. Wilson Eastland has had a bad experience and wanted this H-1 for some of his neighborhood development. Jane Graham has lived in that neighborhood for a number of years, and we'll let you know about the amenities she's enjoyed. Graham Pohl is an architect, and he will address his thoughts about the boundaries, and he has two properties in this district and is on the Board of Architecture Review. And Adby Jones will talk to you about how this has been a good investment for her. when I think about this and this certainly is not fact don't take it as such when I try to liken what this means to people in Lexington I think at one time I told the board the planning and zoning commission you know when you go through different towns and you're a traveler and people say where are you from and you say well I'm from Lexington, Kentucky and they say well what's it like if you put you know, ten things on your hand. What is nice about Lexington? What's unique about Lexington? I've lived here all my life, my dad, my grandfather, my great-grandfather, and you know, you think about Keeneland, and you think about basketball, and you think about Henry Clay's home, and these types of neighborhoods, and Gratz Park, and the things that make this town just a little bit unique to give it the personality that we like to enjoy. And as these people have said to me, they've chosen to live in a historic district, and they'd like to keep it that way. And so with that, I'll quit. And Mayor, if you want to call these witnesses in order that I've had, you can, or I can do it for you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Fugazi. All right. First up, then, will be Tony Shamblin, Association President. And if you can give us your name and address, and you'll have three minutes. Good evening. who has signed up to speak on 4, the H-1, has told me he would waive his time to me if necessary. Is that permissible? Is he present? He is present. And, okay. Yes, we do permit that. Thank you. That's our usual way. Thank you. Thank you, Mrs. Vice Mayor and members of the Council. So congratulations to those of you who are newly elected. My name is Anthony Chamblin. Most people call me Tony. I live at 240 South Ashland Avenue here in Lexington. I'm the immediate past president of the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association, and currently I am chairman of the APNA H1 Advisory Committee. Our mission statement is as follows. The non-profit Ashland Park Neighborhood Association exists to improve the overall quality of life in the historic Ashland Park neighborhood and to support the commonwealth of its members. Why did the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association apply for H-1 status for Ashland Park? Besides the obvious reasons which have been enumerated by previous speakers, such as the undisputed historical relevance and the architectural significance of the neighborhood, there are many other reasons that prompted our action. They included a recent teardown of a property in the neighborhood, provided a wake-up call. We realize there could be other potential teardowns. We believe there could be threats of commercial invasion. We decided to pursue a proactive course to act before the horse got out of the stall, so to speak. An example of what could happen already did happen on the corner of South Ashland Avenue and Main Street, where this beautiful Victorian house once stood. The property was purchased for development. Randy Shipp believes it happened sometime during the 1950s. The house was demolished and replaced in order by a gasoline station, a liquor store, and currently a produce market. This is the market that exists there today. Our primary goal is to protect and preserve the historic, cultural, and architectural importance of the buildings in our neighborhood. Without such protection, we eventually would lose parts of the neighborhood to encroachment by commercial entities, or lose historically and culturally relevant structures to apartment buildings or structures out of character to the neighborhood. If not for historic preservation, Lexington might not still have such wonderful landmarks as the Opera House, the Kentucky Theater, the Old Courthouse, the Mary Todd Lincoln House, the John Hunt Morgan House, just to name a few. As Linda Carroll, president of Bluegrass Trust, pointed out in a recent editorial in Preservation Matters, many historic buildings were demolished during the 20th century. They included the Thomas Hart House, now a parking lot. In our view, predictability means stability. Exactly 150 Ashland Park property owners who returned postcards to the Planning Commission voted in favor of H-1. Only 50 persons opposed. And APNA-sponsored economic analysis of properties on South Ashland and Central Avenue, which was designated H-1 in 1989, showed an increase in value by 68% over and above properties in the non-H-1 part of the district that we're asking to be included. To quote Lexington Herald columnist Tom Eblen, H-1 zoning for Ashland Park should be a slam dunk. Today you will receive evidence and hear testimony from many of our neighbors and from historical leaders who support our application. As you can see by the large number of Yes H1 stickers in the audience, many people have braved the elements to be here tonight in our support. We thank them and we thank you for your attention and consideration of our application. Thank you very much, Mr. Shamblin. So technically, there's a minute and 38 left for David Jaquith if he needs it. Next, Wanda Jaquith, if you'll state your name and address, please. You'll have three minutes. Good evening. I am Onda Jaquith, a 40-year resident of South Hanover Avenue. Additionally, my husband David and I own a fourplex on Deshaies Road. I'm a past president of Ashton Park Neighborhood Association, but most recently I served as secretary of APNA during the entire H-1 process. Beginning in January of 2011, AP&A's board began active and transparent pursuit of an H-1 overlay zone for the already identified properties. AP&A conducted six overlay zone meetings from June through October of 2011. Two meetings in June and July were held with Hanover Towers residents. Three public meetings were held in August, September, and October, led by historic preservation staff and attended by planning commission staff. Approximately 150 people attended these informational meetings. Finally, the H-1 overlay effort was presented at the AP&A General Membership Meeting in September with historic preservation staff in attendance to answer residents' questions. Notification of the three public meetings was posted on the neighborhood website, and notification of the September and October meetings appeared in the September 2011 issue of Chevy Chaser Magazine. Print notices were left at every affected property prior to the August, September, and October public meetings. Articles discussing the overlay effort appeared in the summer and winter issues of APNA's newsletter, Clay's Beacon. The September 2011 Chevy Chaser article discussed the H-1 initiative and included a map of the proposed area. During the months of September 2011 through March 2012, board members and other residents made one-on-one educational visits and circulated a petition supporting the overlaid effort. Finally, in January of 2012, President Tony Chamblin sent a letter to non-resident owners of properties in the proposed district. In short, we made every attempt to educate and inform as many affected residents as possible through a completely public and transparent effort. In January of 2013, based on an open records request made by Tony Chamblin, Anne Kamek and I verified the Planning Commission's postcard return, and you have an affidavit in your packet that attests 150 favor, 50 oppose, and 4 had no opinion. Thank you. That was perfectly three minutes. But for the record, we need to know your house number on South Hanover. If you could please go back to the microphone and give us your address. We first lived at 252, but I currently reside at 250 South Hanover. Thank you very much. Next on the witness list is Bob Sessom. If you'll give us your name and address, and you'll have three minutes. Thank you. I'm Bob Sessom, resident of Hanover Towers Condominium, 101 South Hanover, Suite 6L. I'm also Vice Chair of the Board of Directors of Hanover Towers Condominium. Hanover Towers is a condominium complex of 99 units, of which two are commercial. The commercial remaining 97, 1, 2, and 3-bedroom suites are all individually owned with separate property titles, as other property owners in the outland black. Our property owners reign in age from 22 years of age to 96 years. Our residents provide an imposing gateway to this historical neighborhood. We've had three residential meetings regarding the H-1 overlay. The vast majority is very much in favor of this historical district zoning. Among the many reasons the Board and residents feel that the character of the neighborhood remaining the same is the result of our market value being stable and even increasing, especially during the most recent recession. We're getting all ages moving into Hanover Towers and our new residents tell us it is the location but they also state it's the fact that there has been very little change in the appearance of the historical settings of the 20s and the 30s Across the street from us and around us are apartments and single dwelling homes, many with very unique historical architectural design It is a very quiet and relaxed family atmosphere where you can take evening strolls with your family walk to the grocery store or a restaurant and even downtown Folks looking at condo living when they come to Hanover Towers and by indicate that's what they're looking for, a secure, definable, established, non-changing neighborhood just beyond the center of downtown. And all this can be assured with an H-1 zoning overlay protection. We now have the opportunity to preserve the character of this neighborhood that is a historically significant example of integrated subdivisions and landscaping design. I am sure that you are aware in the early part of the 20th century, the renowned Olmstead Brothers, one of the founding firms for landscape architects and city planning in the United States, designed this Ashland subdivision. Ashland Park was planned with carefully designed relationship between private residents and public roads, with landscape mediums, walkways, and ride-aways. There are uniform setbacks for placement of the houses on the lot, which are important tools, used to provide visually cohesive green space as a complement to the landscaping of the public areas, all known benefits of the Elmstam Brothers design. The majority of the neighborhood desire to help maintain this lovely neighborhood in the midst of continuing pressure on our neighborhood boundaries with retail and other business growth in this area, and to provide guidance and structure for modification to the existing structures that can entirely change the character of this neighborhood, if not regulated in some fashion. Your consideration in approving this H-1 request will be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much. Next witness is David Adkison. If you'll give us your name and address, please. You'll have three minutes. Thank you, Vice Mayor Gordon and Council Members. I'm Dave Adkison at 1000 Richmond Road, and I'm here as a private citizen tonight to speak on my own behalf and perhaps on behalf of my wife, if she'll let me. I thank you for your service and for your patience tonight. This is an important matter to our neighborhood, and I'm glad to speak on behalf and in favor of this change. My wife and I returned to Kentucky about eight years ago now after six wonderful years in Birmingham. We were originally from Owensboro, but we returned to Kentucky, and we chose this neighborhood for several reasons. One is, in Birmingham, we had lived in a neighborhood designed by the same Olmstead firm, built at the exact same time this neighborhood was built. So we chose this because of the ambiance, the character, the integrity of this neighborhood, and the fact that the neighborhood and its historic condition had not been significantly compromised with other developments during the years. As a favorite, obviously I'm speaking from my perspective, and my perspective is shaped to some extent by experience that I had in Owensboro. When I was there, I had the honor of serving the city of Owensboro, and I was mayor there for eight years. And during that process, I went to City Hall without much knowledge of the whole planning and zoning process. But I learned because we rewrote the comprehensive plan during my first term, and so I had to kind of get deep in the weeds with that plan. But I developed a respect for that process because it was citizen-based. The staff was very professional. The research they did was professional. The layers of committee approvals that go into decisions is something that is very true to our democracy. And so when decisions, and there were hundreds of decisions that came to our commission during my years, that process produced those decisions up the ladder, and they came to us. And frankly, the burden was pretty significant on me if I wanted to differ with that process. I had to stop and think, okay, why would I go against a neighborhood? Why would I go against a committee? Why would I go against the Planning and Zoning Commission, half of whom I had some hand in appointing? So I earned that deep respect. Of course the city council has legally and rightfully the right to overturn those things, but I think the process is very, very valid. Frankly, our process in Owensboro was heavily borrowed from Lexington. You might use the word plagiarized. We borrowed heavily from the Lexington Comprehensive Plan when we developed our own. So I encourage you tonight to consider the overwhelming request from the neighbors of this neighborhood and also the process that has led through the research, the staff work, the committee structure, and planning and zoning to bring it to you here tonight. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you very much, Mr. Atkison. Next is Graham Pohl. If you'll give us your name and address, please, and you'll have three minutes. Graham Pohl, 977 Fincastle Road, which is one of the Franklin Curtis houses, the second one I've lived in in the neighborhood. My wife and I not only live in the proposed district, we also own an apartment building on Fontaine Road. I was going to reflect on the few no H1 signs that you see in the neighborhood, as many of them are at rental properties with non-resident landlords. Being a landlord and not residing in the building that I rent, I have a different opinion. I suspect that my opinion may be based on a slightly more long-term perspective on the value of the property and how it returns wealth and goodness to me and to my community. So as a landlord, my wife and I support the new zoning. My experience with H-1 zoning is probably unique for people in this neighborhood. My first exposure was as an architect shepherding clients' projects through the review process. I've represented numerous clients in historic districts overseeing projects from beginning to completion. At first, I found the requirements annoying. I felt that they were interfering with my creative freedom and that they added layers of difficulty to my clients in their efforts to get permits. As I became more familiar with the guidelines and the review process, my attitude changed. I began to recognize that the guidelines were actually quite brilliant. They allow for a wide range of possible solutions to any given problem. And I also learned that the historic preservation staff can be a wonderful resource. I think that's one of the most overlooked aspects of the process. They're free, they're trained, they're knowledgeable, and they're absolutely on the side of the property owner. It is not an us versus them scenario. It became clear to me that the secret to a good experience was to start off with a positive attitude. H1 zoning does require a slightly different approach to each project, so it could be seen as an additional constraint, but any good designer will tell you that constraints are fundamental to good design. For the most part, the H1 constraints are easy to understand, and at times they can be truly inspirational. This neighborhood represents an extraordinary heritage, and it's profoundly worthy of the little extra effort required to meet H-1 requirements. I'm now serving on the BOAR, so I've actually gone from skeptical supplicant on this side of the podium to the dark side sitting up in your chairs. So I now have a much deeper understanding of the guidelines and the process. I'm even more supportive than I was prior to serving. I recognize the process isn't perfect for every situation, but it works extremely well most of the time. And the flexibility built into the guidelines and the review process truly serve all applicants. Taken as a whole, the process is incredibly good for our community, our culture, our history, and our legacy. I strongly urge you to support the change. Thank you very much, Mr. Pohl. Next is David Berg. And if you'll give us your name and address, and you'll have three minutes. Vice Mayor Gordon, members of the council, my name is David Berg. I live at 291 South Ashland Avenue, and I am a current member of the board of the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association. When my family moved into our home on South Ashland Avenue in 1968, Many houses were in a serious state of disrepair, and several had been divided into apartments, indications that the street was in a perilous transition stage. In fact, shortly after our arrival, a beautiful Victorian house on the street was raised to be replaced by a shoddily constructed apartment building, a tragic and irremediable transformation. At about the same time, a developer approached me and my two adjacent neighbors seeking to buy our properties. We all three rejected his offer. Had we not, three unique houses would have been replaced by an eight-story apartment building at the northwestern corner of South Ashland and High Streets, and the historic character and inheritance of the street would have been lost forever. We three made the right choice. But the long-term future of an entire neighborhood should not depend upon the choices of two or three of its temporary residents who are only stewards of their properties for future generations. Recognizing the continuing threat to our neighborhood, residents of South Ashland and South Hanover Avenues joined together in 1970 to create our Neighborhood Association, of which I was a founding board member. Over the succeeding years, we fought many fights over zoning and other issues, and our efforts helped to stabilize South Ashland Avenue. But we came to recognize that we needed some greater level of protection if the street was to endure as we knew it. Consequently, after a year of hard work, in 1989 we secured an H-1 historic overlay for South Ashland Avenue and the first block of Central Avenue as the downtown corridor to South Ashland. It was vitally important to include Central as a connector or gateway whose old housing stock was also in peril, just as today it is vital to include properties on High, Fontaine, and Richmond Roads in the current proposal, since such border areas are most vulnerable to undesirable changes that imperil the larger neighborhood. Since we secured the historic overlay in 1989, the transformation of South Ashland and Central Avenue has been dramatic. Nearly all of the properties have been renovated or upgraded. Nearly all are again single-family homes. Landscaping has been enhanced, and this unique neighborhood, admired by all Lexington residents and visitors, has been saved for the benefit of future generations. As a result, I can resolutely attest to the totally overriding value of having the H-1 overlay, a value far outweighing any inconvenience involved in seeking Historic Preservation Commission or Board of Architectural Review approval of external changes to properties. The H-1 overlay has been the most beneficial development ever to occur on my street during my 44-year residency. Anyone who has strolled our street over the years will tell you that all that has happened there since 1989 has been totally positive and that the entire Lexington community has profited as a result. Mr. Berg, I have the unfortunate task of telling you your time has expired. I simply urge you to approve this proposal. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next witness is Ann Kamak. We'll keep doing the same thing, name, address, and you'll have three minutes. My name is Ann Kamak. I live at 231 Deshaies Road and have lived there since 1975. You might want to refer to the affidavit regarding property values, which is located in your packet. Several of the previous speakers have referred to our property value study. When we first started talking about H-1, people asked how it would affect our property values. We had studies from historic districts around the country and from some Lexington neighborhoods indicating that historic preservation boosted property values. but we decided we needed to see what had happened to the property values in our neighborhood, which includes both the South Ashland H-1 district and the proposed Ashland Park district. We went to the PVA office, where cards were pulled for each address in our area, one area with H-1 and one area with the proposed H-1. We recorded the fair cash value of each property in 1989, the year that the South Ashland H-1 District was established, and the fair cash value again in 2012, the most recent information available to us. We totaled the fair cash values of the individual properties for these two years, and this is what we found. South Ashland H1 District, the total fair cash value of all property in 1989 was $9,850. By 2012, the fair cash value of these same properties had grown to $32,575,000, a monetary increase of $22,725,000 and a percentage increase of 231%. In the proposed Ashland Park H1 property values, totaled $29,400,000 in 1989. By 2012, the value had grown to $77,298,000, a monetary increase of 47,884,000 and a percentage increase of 163%. Between 1989 and 2012, property values in the historic district in our neighborhood grew 68% more than the part of the neighborhood that did not have historic protection. So we think these figures show that historic zoning has had a positive effect on property values where we live. Thank you, Ms. Cammack. Next witness is Wilson Eastland. If you'll state your name and address, please. Yes, Madam Vice Mayor, members of the council, I'm Wilson Eastland. I have lived at 224 South Hanover since 1974. Raised my children there. Loved the house. From my family room window, I used to look out and see blue sky and trees. Contrary to what you may think, this is not a block house to keep the Indians out of Fort Boonesboro. It is a garage. I know more than anyone else likes to have the government tell me what to do, but I do wish somebody had said no. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wells-Eastland. Next is Jane Graham. And if you'll state your name and address, please. I have three minutes. Thank you. I'm Jane Graham. I live at 336 Deshaies Road. Madam Vice Mayor, members of the council, citizens here in attendance, good evening. My husband, age 83, and I, age 75, bought our house at 336 Deshay Road in 1970, when our children were a year and a half and three years respectively. They spent their childhood in that house, wandering at will down to Slash's Islands, playing soccer, baseball, or just picnicking. Since then, we have watched at least one and a half repeat cycles of young parents moving in and raising their children in this now unique environment so suited to residents of all ages, even those of a somewhat advanced age as we. What we have valued is the well-ripened age of the Ashland neighborhood. It's sidewalks that actually link up to other sidewalks and go somewhere. to the shopping district of Chevy Chase to Henry Clay's house, to the schools serving our children, and to the people in the neighborhood who recognize Ashland's communal value. And equally important, the varied architecture built to scale to accommodate both ancient shade trees and swing sets in backyards. Maintaining the safety, livability, and character of Ashland has required constant vigilance, time, and effort. Our home and property have been particularly vulnerable to the pressure from non-resident owners of property at our end of Deshaies and the contiguous strips of Fontaine running to High Street. Rental property owners often harbor dreams of more lucrative uses for their property than family-occupied residences. I do not refer to the current lessees who are adjacent to me in that regard about whom I have no such complaints. The exteriors and grounds of some rental properties have presented and continue to present eyesores and treacherous passage, which diminish the enjoyment of simply sitting out on one's porch to enjoy the outdoors and the safety of walking on deteriorating sidewalks. The house at one of the entry points to our neighborhood, the juncture of High and Fontaine, has been repeatedly allowed to deteriorate, a neglect due likely to the desire of the non-resident owner to somehow benefit from a zone change to business. The single family house four doors from us has been empty for 15 years, had a no on H1 sign, and is deteriorating badly. I have heard it said that the elderly will flee the neighborhood in the event of the H1 overlay passing. I'm not sure of the genesis of such a rumor, although it may be attributable to several scare letters which have been circulating containing misstatements and suggesting dire consequences of overlay. On the contrary, for reasons I have presented, the H1 overlay will allow us to relax and enjoy our home for the remainder of our lives without having to worry about fighting the next battle with a non-resident owner who decides to dismember or disfigure a fine old building that never did anything to deserve such treatment. Thank you very much for your attention. Thank you very much, Ms. Graham. And the final witness is Abby Jones. If you'll give us your name and address, please. Good evening, Council. Abbey Jones, 1022 Fontaine Road. I'm a three-year resident of that property. My husband is from Kentucky, and we moved specifically to Lexington for my husband to join the faculty because of Chevy Chase and Ashland Park. We could have moved elsewhere, but that was the deciding factor in why we came and relocated here. I hope that Lexington makes better choices in my hometown of Murfreesboro, Tennessee, which turned one of its historic areas into an area now referred to as Vinyl City. Areas adjacent to the UK in some specific areas remind me of Vinyl City. I want permanent protection for my neighborhood. I also understand the concerns of property rights. I've lived in Texas and worked in construction in Texas. They want historic, but they sadly don't have much history out in Texas that has lasted due to some of the harsh environs there. They also understand that living in a city means that you have regulations and that you have neighbors, and that those regulations are because you have neighbors and you need to get along. I also desire meaningful subdivision regulation protections. Right now, you can put a cinder block wall in your front yard and build your house out of all vinyl. And you can't do that in any any new subdivision in Lexington because you have additional subdivision regulations that we are a precursor to. This detailed aesthetic protection needs to happen for the look, the integrity, and the stability of our neighborhood. As this is our permanent dream home, I've told my husband we're not moving ever again, we are vested in the permanent future of our neighborhood, and we don't want to just leave that to chance. We are a healthy neighborhood now, and as an example of that, our home has actually appraised for $60,000 higher in the three years that we've been there since we refinanced about three months ago. And two of our neighbors have sold recently with less than 60 days on the market. What you decide tonight will affect what happens in the future during the next eventual buyouts and teardowns without these regulations. Please vote in favor. Thank you, Ms. Jones. That concludes the witness list that Mr. Fugazi gave. Does that conclude your presentation? Thank you. Now, we'll turn to Mr. Vickroy. And I believe you said you had two witnesses. Is that or did you not have any? I don't have any. Okay, that's fine. I represent two residents. That's fine. My name is Stephen Vickroy. My address is 250 West Main Street, Suite 1850, 40507. And you'll have 15 minutes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Members of the Council and Vice Mayor, I represent Shirley McVeigh Wiseman. She is the owner of 1003 Fontaine Road. And I also have been asked to represent Calvin and Meg Cranville, who live at 271 South Iceland Avenue. I'm in the unenviable position today of arguing somewhat against historic preservation, so I feel like I'm already on an uphill battle that I may have to concede. It's going to take more than maybe my skills will allow. But with that said, each of these objectors truly feel that because of some of the demographics that have been shown tonight, and I will introduce a document into the record, that their property and those around them in the area in which they live could be exempted from this zone. This line that you saw that outlines the study area was drawn with some particular guidance from the Historic Preservation Ordinance. But it's a line that they chose, not something that was absolutely mandatory. So I'm going to talk with you a little bit tonight about possibly changing where that line may go. And with that, I'm going to go ahead and hand out a map to each of you. And one to Madam Clerk. Mr. Shelley had this map on over at the end. We can pass them down. We'll pass them down for you. Thank you. Hopefully there's more than enough words. As a result of the vote of the residents, I think if memory serves me correct, postcards were sent out to all the affected landowners, and results were received. And in this map that you'll see, there are green properties, white properties, red properties, brown properties. and the key in this shows all of the properties that were noted in green, which is obviously an overwhelming majority, were supporters of this application. However, you're going to notice a lot of properties that are white. These people didn't send in a response. They didn't care enough about this ordinance to say yes. You're also going to see red properties. These people cared enough to say no. The ones that are brown were ones that came in after the original consideration, I think by the Board of Architectural Review. And these brown properties were ones that said no. As you look at this map, I want you to, if you could, come down following Hanover Avenue. There are two traffic circles with a nice treed median that you travel around. The second one is at Slashes Road, and then Slashes Road heads south from there. If you'll look from Slashes Road west to East High Street and Fontaine Road, in that area I counted 80 residents, 80 properties. Of those 80 properties, 48 either said no to this ordinance or said I don't care. Did not say yes. There were 32 that did say yes. But with that said, from that area, if we could draw that line just down Slashes Road and exempt that, you would be exempting an area in which 60% of the residents did not want this overlay zone. And I would hazard to guess if somebody came to this body with the entire area 60% opposed or did not care or did not say no, this body would probably reject that application. and while Mr. Fugazi doesn't believe so I believe that the restrictions in this overlay zone can be onerous especially in the event of a fire or other calamity that would cause severe damage to one of these properties I don't think anybody's asked the question if that were to occur obviously there's insurance out there but what if the insurance company said no, we're not, under your policy, we're not going to give you the money that you need to comply with this ordinance to rebuild your home. And that they were going to have to be out of pocket for whatever additional monies the insurance company would not approve. I don't think anybody's ever asked that. Now, a lot of what's been testified to here today is property values. In my opinion, that's irrelevant. I don't think any of the criteria that were listed in Article 13 or in any of the National Historic Preservation Guidelines involved how it affects the value of your property. and in addition to that there's not been an appraiser or anyone else with any competence come up here and say that the sole reason for the increase in the value that these folks talked about was the result and the sole result of an h1 overlay zone so in my opinion all of that testimony at least in in with respect to the values of property should be considered by this board to be or in the council to be irrelevant. In addition to the issue of the numbers of people that live west of Slashes Road, that's a natural boundary that this board could direct the Planning Commission to use. I mean, it's not like we're taking an arbitrary point and asking you to cut off the overlay zone there. The Slashes Road and its extension would be a natural boundary that we could use. It's not like we're saying pick A here, property A to be in the zone, property B over here to be out of the zone. We're just asking for a particular area that has a natural boundary within the subdivision. And if the individuals, arguably there are 40% of the individuals in that area that did vote for it, But they have the ability themselves to restrict their properties if they want. They can adopt the Article 13 requirements and put them in a set of restrictions for their own property. If they are that concerned about the future development of their property and not just the current property value, if they are that concerned, they can restrict their own property. They have the ability to do that privately. With respect to the recommendations of the Planning Commission, I had a few problems with some of the things that they concluded after their October 25th meeting. One, growing a successful community. One A on the recommendations that were presented to you. This is a successful community. It's already been a successful community for nearly 100 years. This neighborhood doesn't need help preserving itself or considering growing itself as a successful community. It's gone beyond what anybody could have ever imagined in 1919. and in my opinion a lot of what we're asking here at least what they're asking for is for this council to say that you don't trust the folks that voted no or they don't trust their neighbors to do what the neighborhood has been doing for you know 1919 to now was is that 93 years and obviously there's that one exception the gentleman that had the garage built next to him unfortunately for him that happened but he could have exercised some legal rights don't know exactly why he didn't but I think he could have prevented that garage from being built if he had come to this council with the right argument I believe he could have prevented that But be that as it may, this is a successful community. It really doesn't need this help. Everybody seems to be worried more about their property value than what's going to be there for their grandchildren and for future generations. In addition, I don't see the urgency. Is there anything that I don't know? Is there something pressing coming from outside this area that seeks to change this neighborhood? In my opinion, I just don't know that there's a great urgency for that. Nobody's come here and said that there's people that are looking to come into this neighborhood, tear it down, and build something less impressive than what's there now. In addition, this neighborhood is already on the National Register for Historic Places. To preserve your property, to preserve its value, and to promote folks coming into this neighborhood, in my opinion, having that on your resume is more than sufficient to not only draw in the right buyer who's going to preserve the integrity without the help of this body, and it's a situation where the type of owner in a neighborhood like this is all that's needed to preserve it. It doesn't need the help of this council to do so, especially when the ordinance that you might adopt might adversely affect a great number of people that's in this neighborhood as well. You know, it's a matter of trust. If they don't trust them, and I think a vote of this council to approve the ordinance could also mean that this body doesn't necessarily trust the neighborhood either. A vote of no confidence, a vote of distrust. I hope it doesn't come down to that, but in my opinion, that may be what's there. and finally with respect to the the situation i think miss graham talked about um is is one that i think uh was already discussed in the planning uh commission uh presentation is that enacting this ordinance doesn't mean that you can go out and make somebody fix up their property. That's not what this ordinance does. There are other ordinances, code enforcement ordinances, that provide that remedy if that's necessary. But if somebody just doesn't keep their yard mowed enough times or if somebody has an unsightly yard, This ordinance doesn't give this council or the Board of Architectural Review, the Planning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission, the power to go out there and force somebody to do something. It can only limit what it may do if it tries to improve, change the exterior of the building, or if they try to change the landscaping. So it's not going to force somebody to go out and make their yard look better. It's just going to prevent them from changing something beyond what the ordinance would require. But it's not going to give them the power to go out and make that change. So it seems like the supporters have some unrealistic expectations with regard to how it's going to affect the values of the property and how it's going to affect their ability to enforce keeping the neighborhood completely in line with what they think it should be. It is a great community. I don't believe that the people that are going to own properties there need to have this protection because I think that in general probably 95% of those owners are going to already want to preserve their property and don't need the help of this council. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vicroy. Now, council members, I'm going to give you an opportunity to ask questions about any of the presentations that took place. Then we'll have staff, if they want to make any additional comments, the petitioner and the Mr. Vicroy, a chance to rebut and give closing summation, and then we'll have comments from the public. So, Council Members, if you have a question, will you please log in? And these will be questions based only on what you've heard so far. Council Member Massadi. Just as a point of order, Vice Mayor, do the opponents have an opportunity to speak as the other proponents did, the citizens? They didn't have any witnesses. Okay, thank you. We have a list of opponents, but they're individuals. They're not witnesses. Okay, thank you. Council Member Lawless. This, too, is just kind of a business. I'm sorry, what's the question? This, too, my comment, and for the audience, some of us have been in back-to-back meetings since about 8.30 or 9 this morning. Do you need a quick break? Could we have a few-minute break before we hear testimony? I don't want to be disrespectful, but I don't want to wet my pants either. Well, we don't want that either. So let's take a five-minute recess. So please be back at 7.45. Did you have a question? Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. We have lots of people who want to speak, and so it's going to take us a while to get through this. so I thought we would come back off of our recess, which was a very good idea, Councilmember Lawless. Now, let's see, where were we? Okay, Councilmembers, are there any other questions about what you've heard so far? This is just about the information you've heard so far. Councilmember Ford. Oh, yes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I think I'm up to speed on in regards to the testimonies for the attorneys thus far. I kind of want to ask at the end of the night exactly what actions are we going to be requested to take. I hope not to be premature, but this will help me as I consider the testimony that's going to be given. I guess that's a question for Bill Sully, if it's appropriate, Vice Mayor, at this time. Mr. Sully. I think at the end of the evening, once you make your findings a fact, the ordinance will be whether or not to apply and create an H-1 overlay for this entire area. Obviously, we don't know what other testimony you'll hear this evening, and you've already had one request to consider maybe a smaller area. But at the end of the day, I think that will be the request before you. So first we're working on hearing testimony and then establishing findings of fact. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Yes. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm sorry. I have some questions based on what I've already heard, but I want to hear the rest of the testimony before I ask my questions. You'll have another opportunity, plenty of opportunity. Thank you. Although I guess I should ask Law if once we close the hearing, can Council members go back and ask a question of either attorney or the staff? Since that's the deliberation time for Council. Or may it be a witness? We think once you close the hearing, you can discuss it among yourselves, but you probably shouldn't go back unless you're going to reopen the hearing. Okay, well, there's a point where counsel can ask questions right before we close the hearing, so will that work for you? Okay. Council members, are there any questions, any other questions of the staff, either attorney or the witnesses that you've heard? Council Member Beard? Thank you, Vice Mayor. And I don't know who might field this answer, but why was the southern line, I guess it's the southern line, it's kind of a cattywampus, really, going up towards Sycamore? Why was it not included in this area? Was it because of the fourplexes that were on Catalpa and Sycamore? What was the problem? Why isn't it a larger area than it is? I think I can speak to a portion of this. The initial request came from the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association. and the Sycamore, Irving, McDowell streets are not within their boundaries. True enough, the boundaries also do incorporate part of other neighborhood associations, but the ordinance calls for, I believe the phrasing is, logical and well-defined boundaries. That's why what I would consider the north, west, and south boundaries follow the original development patterns, but it did not go any further towards the Ashland estate, and this was the boundaries that were initiated by the Planning Commission. But actually, Ashland Park, as a large subdivision, does include all those areas. Well, it was done in four different development plans, and the area contained within the proposed district is approximately one half of development plan number one, the initial development plan. Okay. I understand what you said. I guess I just don't really understand why. And there's no reason to go digging any further, I guess, because it is what it is. But there are other areas adjacent to this that at some point we're probably going to want to do something themselves, I would think. And I don't know whether they merge with, like McDowell, for instance. McDowell's not, there are two's, I'm sure. In fact, I was raised on McDowell for the first two years of my life. But those are all single-family, I believe. Aren't they, Bill? Council Member Beard, I think most of them are single-family. Many of these streets have interspersed duplexes, fourplexes, and single-family. I know up closer to Richmond Road than McDowell does, yes. I did a lot of moving around when I was two on my little tricycle. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Mr. President. You're welcome. Council Member Massadi. Mr. Salley, if you wouldn't mind coming back down, please. I have a question. You said that this was also part of the National Historic designation as well. Yes. Now, do their guidelines, are they similar to the H-1 overlay guidelines as far as design criteria, or is it just a designation? I believe the correct answer to your question is it's more of a designation. The Secretary of the Interior, U.S. Interior, does have standards for national registered districts. I don't think it's fair to compare those standards to our local design guidelines. Obviously, I believe personally the people who developed our local guidelines are very aware of those U.S. Interior standards, but I don't think they're a fair comparison. Thank you very much. Council Member Akers. Maybe this is for you, Bill. I'm not sure. Are the neighborhoods that are not included on the map or in this proposal, are they represented by neighborhood associations that may later, I guess, seek this overlay themselves, or how would they organize the adjacent properties, I guess, is my question? Why were they not included, or why was the entire historic district not included? I do not know the answer to that question. We first received the request from the neighborhood pretty much with these boundaries. Oh, so the neighborhood determined the original boundaries and application. Yes, the neighborhood brought that when they asked the Planning Commission to initiate this request. Okay. Council Member Scutchfield? Kind of in the same vein, when you're looking at the historic preservation boundaries of the area, Does it cover, is it just that area, or does it go, it keeps going to Henry Clay Estate? The National Register District, yes, does extend farther to the south and east. Okay. Are there other council members who have questions right now of the presentations? If not, I have one question, which a couple of council members mentioned. And a couple of the witnesses, and I believe Mr. Shipp, talked about the National Register of Historic Places. And you talked about the criteria. Does that designation prevent a property from being demolished? I probably should let the historic preservation staff answer that question. Several of the, or a few witnesses mentioned, I think Mr. Shamblin mentioned that a home had been demolished and something else put in its place. So does the National Register designation prevent that? I don't believe so, but I believe the example that the Council was given long predated the designation of the Historic District on the National Register. Do you know, Mr. Shipp? The National Register listing is pretty much a recognition only. The Secretaries of Interior standards would not prevent the demolition unless federal funds were involved. Those standards really only apply when federal money is involved in a project. If a private individual owns a property within a national registered district, any national registered district across the country, they are free to do as they wish with their properties up to and including demolition and new construction. There's nothing to prevent that, again, unless federal money is involved, in which case a separate review kicks into play. Okay, thank you. And we have a couple more questions. Council Member Akers? The Board of Architectural Review and the Planning Commission both approved this proposal, but the Zoning Committee did not, and so I just wondered if anyone could speak to you if there were any reasons given for why the Zoning Committee did not approve it. The Zoning Committee is a subcommittee of the Planning Commission. They did not make findings, and they did not conduct a hearing. They are one of two subcommittees that reviews all applications that are headed to Planning Commission meetings. I was trying to remember whether three or four members of the entire Planning Commission happened to attend that particular meeting. Three. Three. Thank you. And I believe two of the members that voted on the four side were on the committee that day. But I don't believe they made any findings. Thanks. Councilmember Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Could you go ahead and put that map up for me on the overhead? There have been a couple of questions asked about how the boundary was arrived at, and so I'll just throw this out here for whoever wants to answer it. Could you hold my time up, please, until they get that up there? I don't know. There we go. Okay, down here in the corner, when the attorney presented in favor of the overlay, and then they showed all these pictures about the neighborhood and the streets and everything, I assume that the farm was the original farm was that whole big area but Ashland Estates is down here in the right hand corner there's all that area, Sycamore, in between that and the black outlined target area why is that and I know it's sort of the same question that Councilman Beard asked but why was that not included in this because the way it was presented to us I thought all that was the old Ashland farm and so it would seem like all that would be in there so the reason I ask that question is because for me anyway the premise was this is the old Ashland Farm and this is why we ought to keep this 98% of the lots had been built out and all those things but then when you look at this map it doesn't look like it lines up with what was stated if you will Councilman this is my understanding it's not my statement of what the truth is but as I have heard the testimony before and my experience, the map that you're looking at, the top at Richmond Road, and then you see the line that comes down towards my left, I guess it's your left as well, and then it hits High Street and it goes down to Fontaine Road. That, I understand, is the original boundary of the Henry Clay Farm. And the farm goes on up to Henry Clay's home. All right. Now, as I understand how this process worked, and Mr. Shipp is here to correct me, the neighborhood association, which is Ashland Park Neighborhood Association, which includes, in my estimation, 90 percent of that block that you see written there. The dark area? Right. Inside the dark area? Okay. Asked to be recognized to request the historic designation. Now, the Historic Preservation Committee set that boundary where it did on the lower right-hand side, the jagged side. We had no control over that. It would be logical that it would go on out eventually to Henry Clay's home. But the characteristics that were used to qualify and designate this under Section 13 of the ordinance, that it was a historic area that the Olmstead brothers developed the park is all true, and it is part of Henry Clay's estate. So we asked for as much as we could get, and that's the way they drew it. Okay, thank you, sir. Does that help? Yes, sir. Is there someone? Is my time up already? No, you still have a minute 50. Okay, then let me move on to a couple other questions. There was a question earlier it was presented that 65% of the requests under H-1 go to, I guess are approved, and then 35% go to the board. I think you have in your packet from me a summary of the H-1 permits. And it's my understanding that I think you just said that 65% of all the permanent requests are approved by the staff without any further intervention by the board. And then the rest go to the board. And of those, I think 2% were turned down. Okay. That was my question was what percentage of those 35? It's on there. It's a very, very small percentage. Okay. Very, very small. Okay. Okay, and then at some point, can someone speak to, earlier you talked about what warrants, I wrote down the question, what warrants major changes? So if I own a property, the overlay takes place. There's a chart in your packet, and I'm not cutting you off. I don't intend to. There's a chart in your packet that tells what changes you want to make have to be approved by the staff or the BOAR. They're external. If it's repair maintenance, if you're keeping the property the same, I don't even think you have to do that. Painting is not required. When we were here before at other bodies, the complaint had been addressing the cost of what happens to you as a property owner. Right. And we were concerned about the cost of a roof. That's a very large item, and I think that was a legitimate complaint. We heard about windows also. Pull those two things out to show that you can get away from a tile roof, you can put a standard asphalt roof on your house, which they've done two or three times, and I showed you that. The other one was the windows, you know, because if you've got double sash casing windows and all that, you're concerned. If you do like I had to do once and put windows in your house, the aluminum windows, I think, on that list are approved. And I gave you a sheet of paper that showed you that. Okay. So I was trying to address those issues. One follow-up real quick. On the windows, if I've got lead glass, can I still go with the aluminum windows and replace the lead glass with regular glass? Well, Amelia's here, and she knows the answer. Well, was here. Yeah, she's here. Amelia can answer. I think they try to encourage you to keep the old lead glass if they can. But if your window frames are shot, I'm talking way beyond my opinion. I'd like to talk like Steve did and tell you all about what I thought, but I can't do this. Okay. And I recognize my time's up. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. And are you with Historic Preservation? I am. My name is Amelia Armstrong, and I'm the Preservation Inspector. And to answer your questions regarding windows, we look at windows on a case-by-case basis, and it all depends on the window itself. If window replacement is available, then aluminum-clad wood windows would be part of an option of replacement. And then I wouldn't have to use the lead glass over? It would all depend on the window itself. If your window is beyond repair, then you could use a newer option, which would not use lead glass in that particular situation. I'd also like to make one clarification about the Secretary Interior Standards versus our guidelines. Our guidelines are predicated on the Secretary Interior Standards, so they are followed very closely. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Maslavi. Mr. Vickroy, would you mind coming to the podium, please? So I'm clear. You are representing two clients, and you're asking for them to be removed from this overlay. Yes. For properties to be deleted. If they could be exempted. But honestly, in looking at the map that I introduced, Just a more logical boundary line would have been, in my opinion, cutting it off at Slisher's Road, just because the number, the sheer numbers, 60% of the people in there don't want it. Well, that's my next question. Do you know if those are owner-occupied or not? I would say that's probably the, with the exception of obviously Hanover Towers, That's probably an area where there are more tenant-occupied, more. But I don't know any statistics. I apologize. Okay. Thank you. Can you please stay at the podium? I sure can. I don't have anybody yet on my list built up, so I wanted to be clear about what you meant when you talked about, on your map, the percentage of people who were opposed. Are you counting the white properties who did not care enough to vote yes and did not respond? I would consider that a no. That's what I wanted to clarify. So you are not assuming that a no response is a no vote? If they didn't bother to send their card back, did you assume they were not for it? I think that's a logical assumption. And if they assume yes, they don't. Well, I just want to, you don't, it's okay, that's all I want to know. I said that they either said no or they did not care enough to respond. That's all I wanted to know is if you included those. Obviously people that care enough to respond here. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify which of the properties you meant. Okay. I don't have any other people on my list, council members. So first I will ask if the staff has any additional comments. No. Okay. Thank you very much. Now, the petitioner, Mr. Fugazi, do you have any rebuttal? As court, Madam Mayor and Council Members, I wanted to just take the moment to reflect. When I stood up, I very joctorally talked about lawyers being put under oath, and I meant that for a reason. And no offense to Mr. Vickroy, who's a dear friend of mine and we have lunch with him frequently. He gave you his editorial comments, and that's exactly what they are. Now, I could stand up here and give you my opinion all night long, and if you buy it and take it to the bank, that's fine, but it's not evidence. In response, we put the testimony in about the value of these properties because in the hearings below, there was questions about the economic impact negatively this might have on properties, and we found that to be not true. Mr. Vickroy's example about having a fire loss that's underinsured, I don't know how that relates to this at all, but that's his comment. So we, I quit. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Vickroy, do you have any rebuttal? I actually had the opportunity to respond to the airway while I presented. All right. Thank you. Okay. Do you have any closing summary? I guess if I could. You and Mr. Fugazi will have an opportunity for closing summation. With all due respect, I have to admit, Bo is probably right. Most of what I said that was a fact was editorializing. I got hired yesterday. Give me a break. But some of the facts that were brought out just actually just after I even presented came to mind. And, Mr. Beard, thank you. You reminded me of some of the thoughts that I had. Why wasn't the other area included? We've been given some reasons. Unfortunately, Mr. Farmer's not here. Hopefully he could have told us one reason. He lives in that area that's not included. That's why he's not here. But with that said, but now we're hearing that it was the neighborhood that chose. And you may have chose some of these boundaries. That's kind of what I heard. I mean, tell me if I'm wrong. Let's let Mr. Vickroy have his summation, please, and then Mr. Fugazi will have the same. I don't know what the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association actually includes. I don't know if it includes all of the properties down to the Henry Clay Estate all the way down to Woods Point or not. I have no idea. But if it is, maybe a question that this council might ask their president and some of their officers is, did they take any votes of that entire area before they decided to choose this little area that is being carved out, which includes my clients? What if the majority of the owners below that line from Fontaine Road South, what if the majority of them really didn't want this? That's why this little area may have been just included in this request. I don't know. I really am guessing that you can ask. There are people here that you can ask those questions up. And the thing about it was, I was hired yesterday, and I got to meet with some of the planning people today, as a matter of fact, starting at about 4.30, to look at some of this stuff. And one of the things I was told is that the area, like Mr. Beard presumed, when they went and looked at the area, they didn't think that this area architecturally would have been included. Now, maybe later on, you never know. But that's what I was told. Not that the neighborhood decided that this was the area, but that they looked at the entire area and just chose this specific area, and that it was a decision of the planning and all of its subdivisions to just consider this area. So that happened long before I got involved, but that was what I was told about 4 o'clock, 4.30 today, so that it did not meet the architectural, and so that's why it was not included. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vickroy. Mr. Fugazi, do you have a closing summation? I don't want to belabor this year, Mayor. Mr. Vickroy took another shot at somebody said something about why something happened, and I don't know who that person was or what they said. If they were on the planning staff, they surely could have been here. And it almost stuns me that he didn't hear that they sent postcards to X number of people who lived in the neighborhood association and got responses or not. I mean, that's all they can do. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right, now it's time for us to have comments from the public, and I have lots of people signed up to speak. and you'll each have three minutes just like the witnesses did and I'll ask you please when you come to the podium to state your name and address and our clerk will set the time clock. And you'll remember the rule about repetition and irrelevance. First I have David Jaquith who has one minute and 38 seconds left if he wants it. No? Okay. Next I have John Rohrer. And if you can queue up, Charlotte Lakers will be after John. Welcome. Well, thank you. Vice Mayor Gordon and members of the Council, my name is John Rohr. I reside at 1112 Shinoe Road. I'm chairman of the LFUCG Historic Preservation Commission. I've already delivered a letter to you all on behalf of the Commission. I hope it's in your packet. By ordinance, among other things, we are directed to provide guidance to you on matters relating to the establishment and maintenance of historic districts. So that's what I'm here for tonight. The HPC has authorized me to request your approval of the designation of this defined area as Lexington's 15th historic district. My fellow commissioners and I were appointed to the HPC only 18 months ago, and pretty much everything that has come before us since that time has been new to us. We're not professional preservationists or anything like that. And certainly the Ashland Park application is the first historic district application that came before us during our tenure. So when reviewing that, we had to decide what do we look at? What do we review to decide how we make this decision as to whether to send this on to you all with our approval? And I think the answer is in the zoning ordinance that creates historic districts. This council, 50 years ago, decided that historic districts were important to this community, and they established Gratz Park 50 years ago. And I have to quote to you from the zoning ordinance, Section 2, and you might want to take a look at it at some point. The Lexington Fayette Urban County Council hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the preservation, protection, perpetuation, and use of historic districts are public necessities in this town. The protection of these is required in the interest of the economic well-being, prosperity, health, safety, and general welfare of the people. So I would suggest to you the question before you is not the debate over whether historic districts are good, bad, important, economically good. The question before you is whether this particular area that has been presented to you qualifies as a historic district under the zoning ordinance. And I believe that the incredible report study that the Historic Preservation Office presented establishes the fact, and it was found as a matter of fact by the Planning Commission, that this meets five of the nine criteria that it must meet in order to become a historic district. This defined area, it only needs to meet one in order to become a historic district or qualified, it meets five. And I would just tell you that I think you're to review this area that's been presented to you, and whether someone comes along later on with another area to expand it to Henry Clay's estate, I don't know. But you've got before you the area that does qualify, and the HPC would urge you to approve this. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next is Charlotte Lakehurst. Do you know something about Charlotte? I do. She's given me her three minutes, if that's all right. I've signed in later, and I can wait until my turn. Okay, if you don't mind. Charlotte's given me her three minutes. Okay, very good. Thank you. Foster Pettit. Madam Vice Mayor and members of the Urban County Council, this has been an interesting session here. I have heard a lot of reasons why this ought to be zoned with a historic overlay. I certainly endorse those. I live at 316 West 2nd Street across from the Morgan House and adjacent to the first historic overlay district in this community 50-some years ago. I grew up on South Aislinn Avenue in two houses somewhat a long time ago, as I recall, in the 30s and 40s. My grandmother lived in the Shea Road. I would visit her regularly. My mother lived at Hanover Towers for 25 years. But this was my playground with Joe Graves and Jack Judy and a whole lot of people that lived on Hanover. I went to Morton Junior High School, rode my bicycle out there and came back and we played in that area. It's marvelous. And one of the things I think you need to remember about the architecture, many of these places have front porches. You don't find front porches much anymore. This is where the children played. I certainly did that. And it was a neighborhood where you faced people from your front porch. You spoke to neighbors as they walked up and down the street. It was a special neighborhood, and it attracted a lot of people and children. And I want you to remember that because that, in my view, is what makes this district very special and worth preserving. I think the buildings are pretty well maintained at this point, but I know that you can wake up someday if you don't have that protection and you find something next door that's very undesirable. I live on West 2nd but of course many years ago 1955 the Thomas Hunt Morgan the Thomas Hunt House was built in 1794 it was where Henry Clay married Lucretia Hart the daughter and it was a very lovely house and it was torn down for a parking lot and that's where it is now that's when I look out at my front porch I see that parking lot now that's an extreme example perhaps But that is what started the Bluegrass Trust for preservation. And I've been active in that for many years and will continue. But I want you to know that this is a very unique neighborhood in our community that has much history and ought to be preserved. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay, next is Walter Gaffield. I'm working down our list. Vice Mayor Gordon, members of the council, I'm Walt Gaffield. I live at 2001 Bamboo Drive. I'm here speaking on behalf of the Fayette County Neighborhood Council. The Neighborhood Council is an umbrella organization for neighborhoods in Fayette County. We have neighborhoods really throughout the county as members of our association. Ashland Park is a member association of our group. I've been involved in planning in Fayette County for a long time, and as long as I can remember, the comprehensive plan speaks to preserving, protecting, and enhancing and making neighborhoods successful. That's been a goal, as long as I can remember, for this council, past councils, past comprehensive plans. An H-1 overlay zoning is really a method of helping a neighborhood protect the qualities that make a neighborhood distinct and successful. And I think Ashland Park has clearly demonstrated that they meet the criteria for this overlay zoning. In terms of the discussion we've had about why are the boundaries this or that, neighborhood associations are private, nonprofit corporations. They really only have influence on the property within their neighborhood association. And probably most of you live in areas with neighborhood associations, and it would be very difficult for you to jump a boundary and start involving another neighborhood association in something your association wanted to do. You really wouldn't have authority there. You wouldn't know who lived there. You wouldn't have members there. And I think that doesn't preclude other historic areas from coming and doing the same thing or other neighborhood associations. The neighborhood council doesn't usually speak in zoning cases, But we thought in this case, this spoke to something that was important, an important protection for historic neighborhoods really throughout Fayette County. And I'm here to urge you to vote in favor of the historic overlay. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Nancy Vollings. You take your time. No problem. And Nancy, if you press that little button on the right, it will lower the whole podium. That's okay. Okay. I'm fine. Madam Chair, that's okay. I don't need it. Council members, staff, I wanted to say I talked at the last. Can you give us your name and address first for the record, please? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm Nancy Rawlings, R-A-W-L-I-N-G-S, and I live at 246 South Hanover Avenue. I had in mind what I was going to say, but sitting here during this time, I have changed some of what I want to say. and one of the things that really stuck out to me was when the council for those opposed said to cut it off at Slashes Road. If it were cut off at Slashes Road on Hanover, Wanda would not be included. We would not be included. Where Mr. Fugazi was raised would not be included. And I don't agree with that at all. So I don't think that changing the boundary lines will help. And if you did the same thing on Deshaies, there are several people who have spoken that would also be cut off. And I don't think that's a good idea. But the other thing that I wanted to say was that we moved there in 1975. I raised three children in our house there. We have made significant improvement to the property, as have a lot of our neighbors. One of the house on the right of us has been sold recently, and the people that bought it have been working like dogs trying to get the thing in shape to move in. So they've really worked hard, and they're doing a lot of work. And a lot of people do things like that in our neighborhood now. And I think those are things that really will help, and I am in favor of the H1 overlay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next is Kate Savage, who also has three minutes from Charlotte Lakers. And, Kate, were you sworn in? Were you sworn in? Thank you. If you'll give us your name and address, please, you'll have six minutes. I also have Annie Steele's three minutes in the event that I need to... Okay, where is Annie? They're both here. Okay, and Charlotte, where are you? Charlotte's in the corner. Where is Charlotte? Oh, okay, thank you. Okay, so that's nine minutes. Whoops. My name is Kate Savage. I live at 619 Columbia Avenue. It's the Columbia Heights neighborhood. Six years ago, we were here before many of these council members applying for our own H-1 overlay. We were not successful. I am here tonight because I've been asked to speak on behalf of those who want H-1 and to try and show you some of the things that happen when H1 is not in place to protect these properties. Columbia Heights, as a matter of interest, as well as Hollywood, are both parts of the National Register. It provides us with nothing other than recognition as owning properties that are on the National Register. This is my house. I've lived here for 23 years. I've nearly paid it off. When I moved in 23 years ago, of the 15 houses on the 600 block, 10 were owner-occupied, 5 were rental. Today, five are owner-occupied and ten are rental. This is what my neighborhood looks like. American small cottage houses close to UK campus, which meant that we fell prey to the need for student housing. And so without H1 and with several zones and ordinances that weren't in place for us at the time, we were exploited and we were used, expanded, additions were added, properties that were small, meant to be single family houses, suddenly had these enormous vinyl boxes appear overnight. It took us a while as residents to realize what was going on in our neighborhood, that these humongous additions were housing now eight people, ten people, mostly students. Inappropriate. This is an R2 duplex on the corner of Woodland Avenue. That's the front view on the left. That's the side view on the right. And you can see it's a mighty big property. There's a whole lot of people who live in that R2 duplex. So obviously with all those additional people came additional cars. And so we started to see this kind of parking in our neighborhood. There's seven cars there and look at the size of that house. parking in the backyards. It wasn't even just on the grass. Here, everybody has to move for people to get in and out. So it didn't take long before the property owners who had the rental properties started to think about whether they should preserve the green space in the backyard or chop down all the trees and gravel. And then they had the additional conundrum of deciding whether they would gravel the backyard or cement the backyard so that they could accommodate all these cars in R1 and R2 that were originally meant for single-family homes. We had creative parking combinations. We had this house on the left. We had back, side, front yard, and walkways that now provided parking, and the house on the other side. And in case you think you're seeing double, you sort of are, because the developer in this case is the same person, but the property on the left is on Columbia Avenue, and its identical twin is on University Avenue. Two houses the same, where once there was a little cottage, all one. Then with that came garbage, of course. We had to deal with trash because suddenly there were a whole lot of people living in these little houses and they had a dumpster, or not even a dumpster. They had a Herbie, a Rosie, and I guess a Lenny. So we had porch garbage. We had garbage everywhere. So suddenly somebody woke up and said, well, I think the issue might be density. And fortunately, that was when our third council member took the reins and decided that we needed a zoning ordinance text amendment. Savage, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but some council members want to hear your H-1 related comments. Well, it's because without H-1, this is what these people in this neighborhood will be looking at. Exploitation of their property. There's no reason to ask for H1 unless you feel threatened, because it is a burden in one way or another. So these people must feel threatened, as we were, and I'm trying to illustrate what the threat is. So anyway, this little house, after Zota, the next idea was, when they realized they were restricted to four people living there, was landlords decided and developers decided that they would get around that restriction by demolishing. So this little house was demolished. For a while it was a grassy patch, and then we got this instead of that. And that's the street that that vinyl box now is on. This little house on Columbia Avenue, again was demolished overnight, all gone. And we got that instead. Granted, that's not beautiful like some of the properties in South Ashland, but I think it beats that one. And that's the end of my presentation. And really my point was just as a cautionary tale, what can happen without protection? And with the best will in the world and with all the promises, it's just words. Thank you very much. Next is Amy Clark, and she'll be followed by Linda Carroll and then John Morgan. Welcome. Hello, my name is Amy Clark. I live on Castle Road, 628. Kate is telling me she has yielded those minutes. My ambition is not to need them for two minutes and whatever. I asked the clerk how many were left. Two minutes? Thank you. There's been a question raised of the urgency for this overlay, and that's what I'd like to address here. Not long ago, this is not news to you, you held the line on the urban services boundary again. But there's a need to accommodate growth. So there's a new urgency for infill and for redevelopment within the urban service area. But this can threaten the character of established neighborhoods. So it's important, it's critically important, that the infill and redevelopment be sensitive to its context. And I've been reading through about 50 pages in draft form of the update of the Comprehensive Plan 2012, which is winding its way to you, and context-sensitive infill is a phrase that recurs and recurs. It's terribly difficult for a historic neighborhood to argue and to prove that it's historic and that it matters. I well remember in 2005, and if I could, that's my first, right? Good. Okay. In 2005, I think it was, we went before the Board of Adjustment. The owner of this property wanted to get variances on the setbacks, and this is, in fact, a property you've just seen. This is now in the National Register District of Hollywood Terrace. Hollywood is the side street, and it fronts on Ashland Terrace. We were not able to offer evidence that the Board of Adjustment could credit, could admit as evidence that these streets and houses in the surrounding neighborhood were of historic significance and argue that changing the setbacks would have a detrimental effect on the surrounding properties. Our historic significance did not exist before this board. We didn't have an H1. The house was torn down, the lot was subdivided, and now two four-bedroom, four-bath houses stand there. It looks like there's parking for four-plus-four cars as well. H1 is the overlay that enables citizens and owners to claim and to prove that the historic character of their properties deserves and requires the protection of the law. In this time where infill and redevelopment are important, they will come to Ashland Park, too. Ashland Park is changing, but the H-1 overlay will help the property owners to ensure that that change that comes will be context-sensitive and in particular sensitive to the historic context of that Ashland Park area. This is the urgency, I think, that we will see throughout the urban services area and especially for Ashland Park. I will just go through. I invite you to think whether changing the setbacks on this property really does make a difference and could have an impact on the surrounding area. B, slide B, please. That's what replaced it, the old with the new. And I'd like you to visualize to the side of the house fronting on Ashland Terrace, you can almost see a neighbor's house there. D, slide D. Sorry, C, that's it. This is the view from the neighbor's front porch. The setback is that radically different. Slide D. This is the side street as it cuts down to Ashland Terrace. This is Hollywood. So this is more or less the view from the neighbor on Hollywood at this corner. He sees the two new properties. And what are we at? E, this used to be the view from Hollywood of that neighbor there. Okay. F. you'll notice that the side setback on the gray the new house is so narrow that you would think that that driveway belongs probably to the gray house it's hard to tell in fact that's all that's there for setback on the neighboring property the yellow house and their driveway Ms. Clark, I'm sorry that your time is up. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next is Linda Carroll, followed by John Morgan. Welcome. Vice Mayor Gorton, members of the Council, thank you very much for tonight. My name is Linda Carroll. I'm the president of the Bluegrass Trust for Historic Preservation. I'm here in that capacity tonight. Our address is at 253 Market Street. You've heard a little bit of mention of the Thomas Hart House, which was demolished at the corner of Mill and 2nd Street, built in 1794, and the creation of the first historic district in 1958, Gratz Park. But what I want to call to attention to you tonight is what Gratz Park looked like in 1958. Those properties were well, well past the 100-year mark. And what you're dealing here with tonight is an opportunity to be proactive with a neighborhood that is, for the most part, under 100 years. And so you get a chance to get in front of protection for these properties. As they continue to age, future exteriors repairs will be done with a standard that respects their architectural integrity and the neighborhood itself. Homeowners will receive professional advice from the qualified staff in the Office of Historic Preservation and from the members of the Board of Architectural Review who are equally qualified. So we leave you with a trust calling for you to establish Ashland Park as a historic district, to adopt the boundaries in their entirety, and to make this the 15th historic district for our community. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next is John Morgan, and I believe the person who follows you is Jason Sloan, maybe? You can correct me whenever he gets up here. Welcome. Good evening, Vice Mayor and Members of Council. Ms. Sheila Farrell has ceded her three minutes to me as well. Okay, Sheila, you. Oh, there you are. Okay, very good. Thank you. I'm here to speak in favor of the H1 overlay for the Ashton Park Neighborhood Association area in its entirety. I think it's important to recognize that historic preservation is not just preservation of Lexington's character, but also its identity, its uniqueness, its integrity, and its livability. And as other people have shown tonight, the consequences of not having historic overlay can be very significant. I live at 343 North Limestone in a historic district. My wife and I also own a duplex at the corner of 4th and Limestone, also in a historic district. And we've been, I think, very instrumental in trying to work on the properties on East 3rd Street. If you'd had a poll to work out whether East 3rd Street should get an H1 overlay based on the wonderful condition they were in, getting 100% participation from the residents, you wouldn't have got it 15 years ago. You might have got one vote out of 20. There were absentee landlords. There was a crack house. There was a garage, a tire repair shop. There was a moose lodge. There was a pawn shop. It wasn't one of the best streets in Lexington. But why should you preserve it? Because that block had integrity. It was built in the 1830s. These houses in Ashland were built in the 1930s and before. They deserve that same recognition. If you didn't preserve East 3rd Street, if we didn't have the H1 overlay, we would not be investing because we would not have the confidence that our neighbours were going to be held to the same standard. Why would you want to restore a property, putting significant time and effort into restoring something to have, as Kate Savage said, a vinyl box going next door to you? We've got to make sure that standard is consistent across the neighbourhood, maintaining the integrity of the neighbourhood, and thus preserving what Lexington is, a unique place to live. You're going to hear some comments probably about what the ordinance is going to do and what the overlay is going to require of people. My next comments are going to be pre-emptive in that, because I have personal experience of working on numerous properties of what you can and can't do in the H1 overlay areas. I've been to BOAR a number of times. My wife and I have been in the same chamber trying to say what we want to do to a property. Have we been turned down? No. Have we been encouraged to do things better? Yes. Do we respect the historic preservation staff? Of course we do. Do lawyers agree with them the first time through? Probably not. But the projects in the end are much better because of their involvement. We have properties that say 120 East 3rd Street. It was a seven-year department building, but definitely not have got the vote for being in an H1 overlay area. But it's now turned into a single-family house, sold four years ago in the height of economic depression as a very luxurious house. But part of that building was demolished because it didn't fit with the integrity being added on to later. We also added a new garage. We also added a 2,000-square-foot extension. All those things happened within the H1 overlay. We worked on another project, 126 East 3rd Street. Again, if anybody remembers that part of Lexington, it was a pretty run-down house with some wagon wheels out front and definitely didn't look like it would qualify for H1. Underneath that, the windows had been changed. We went back to style-appropriate windows, a new front door, but on the back is a very contemporary cement-boarded addition with a roof garden, something which is allowed under the H1 guidelines. You don't have to replicate a historic structure. In actual fact, the guidelines try and avoid giving a false sense of history. So you're trying to encourage to do something, as Graham Pohl has done on his projects, adaptive use, encouraging, reflecting on the positive of building, and adding to it for the future. We're now working on another project. We are really crazy about these H1 areas, but this was the old Moose Lodge. We've been able to take out the windows, and we're going to replace those. We're not replacing them with historic windows, we're not putting leaded glass back in them, but we are putting windows which are appropriate to the style of the building. We're also taking off a dorm window, or dormer on the top of it, because it wasn't appropriate to the original 1830s period. Anybody else who's been down that street, see we actually demolished part of the front of the building recently. That too is allowed under the H1. Nothing which we have done on our projects has been onerous or overbearing by each one. They've been responsible, responsive to our requirements, and more than anything has led to a better project, and also I hope everybody will recognize this part of downtown is a lot better as a result of it. We had to deal with an area which had got into disrepair because of not having design standards. What's being asked of you tonight is to provide that protection up front for the Ashton Park area so they can avoid having to go through that fighting back from an area which has got into disrepair. Please protect it now to try and maintain the integrity for Lexington and a very special neighborhood which desires this sense of protection. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Morgan. Next is, I believe, Jason Sloan. Is that correct? I'll be seeing my time to Bill Johnson. Okay. All right. and I do apologize. I'm not sure what the next name is, so I'll say the address. 306 Deshay, and I apologize. I'm not sure what your name is. Is anyone here linked to that address? There are two people here linked to that address, but I don't think either one of us has to speak. Okay, so I'll take that person off. Okay, and next is Bonnie Adkisson, and she'll be followed by Janie Fergus. Okay, Janie Fergus, you're passing. We have a lot of passes here. People want to go see the game, I bet. Let's see. Nori Hall. I'll pass. You're passing, too. Council members, are you okay with this? Wynne Meeker. Is Wynne here? Okay. I'll make it quick, too. I didn't realize it was almost 9 o'clock in time for the game. No problem, we're staying. My name's Wynne Meeker. I live at 417 Faya Park in the Faya Park Local Historic District. I've lived there, I hate to admit it, 44 years. We've had the H-1 for about 25 years. It was initiated at the same time as the much larger Northside Historic District. The whole area, the edges were crumbling. Bad things were encroaching on the neighborhood. Wonderful old houses were being turned into slipshod apartment houses for transients. And so we decided to do the H1. And it takes years, but it's back now. They're mostly private residences or they're buildings with condos in them. And the great thing about living in an H-1, it's such a feeling of community. We all know each other all around the downtown. And that's something I think that the new council members need to know. There are currently 14 local historic districts. Of those, 12 encircle the downtown. When consultants come to Lexington, they just can't believe these wonderful, stable, diverse neighborhoods that encircle the downtown. And they wouldn't have been there without historic preservation and H-1 designation. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Meeker. Next is Kenton Ball, and he'll be followed by Susan Davis. You're passing? Okay, Susan Davis. Okay. And next is John Myers. Followed by Vicki Bierenberg. And Vicki will be followed by Bill Johnston and then Carol Iverson. So, welcome. Good evening, Madam Vice Mayor and Council Members. My name is Vicki Bierenberg. I'm the State Certified Local Government Program and Planning Coordinator at the Kentucky Heritage Council, which is the State Historic Preservation Office located at 300 Washington Street in Frankfort. I am here today to voice our support for the designation of Ashland Park as the local historic district. Lexington Fayette-Urbett County Government has been a certified local government since 1988 The Certified Local Government, or CLG, program is a partnership between a local government and the State Historic Preservation Office, enabled by federal legislation to promote and expand historic preservation activities. Your CLG status is evidence that you have been a leader in the practice of historic preservation in Kentucky. Several of the goals and objectives of your comprehensive plan focus on historic preservation of your significant resources. Historic districts in Lexington and around the nation have proven to be successful tools for economic prosperity and growth. Local historic districts are good for property values. They increase investor certainty, insulate against large decreases in value, and are quick to rebound in a volatile housing market. Another economic benefit is that rehabilitation work in these neighborhoods relies on skilled labor much more than materials, which keeps dollars in the local economy. Historic zoning overlays don't stop change. They just serve to manage it effectively in a way that is pleasing to residents, visitors, and in a way that protects the historic integrity of the area for future generations. Residents of the local historic district here in Lexington can also utilize the technical expertise of preservation professionals at the Kentucky Heritage Council when considering rehabilitation projects, which may be eligible for tax credits to offset rehabilitation costs. To clarify again between the differences of national and local historic district designation, national registered designation alone offers no guaranteed protections. Standards and guidelines for national registered districts are, for the most part, voluntary. Only H-1 designation will ensure the long-term protection of the historic character of this neighborhood. The Kentucky Heritage Council encourages you to recognize the value of Ashland Park and ensure that it remains a vibrant asset far into the future by supporting its designation as a local historic district. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Berenberg. Next is Bill Johnston. And, Bill, you will have six minutes, three of yours and three of Jason Slunt's. Give us your name and address, please. I apologize for not passing. I just could not make myself do that. It's all right. That's why we're here. Vice Mayor and Council, thank you for your time. I'm Bill Johnston. I'm president of the Historic Western Suburb Neighborhood Association. Our board supports this historic overlay request and has authorized me to speak in every half. We believe it will benefit all of Lexington. My wife and I live at 645 West Short Street in the Historic Western Suburb. This is one of the oldest neighborhoods in one of the oldest cities west of the Appalachians. It is a small area that lies between Newtown Pike and Broadway and goes from Maine to West Second. It includes part of the Jefferson Street Revival area between Maine and Second, and we helped to make it happen. By the mid-'70s, our neighborhood was literally falling apart. and in real danger of going away. Being designated as an official H-1 local historic district saved it. If you drive through Lexington's historic districts and look really closely, there are many new contemporary buildings in them, along with many very contemporary additions to our historical buildings. The H-1 process is what ensures that what is changed will be done correctly and that the result will add to and not detract from the area. These are neighborhoods people can move into and not be afraid that their neighbors will do something that degrades their surroundings. That confidence is a major factor in sustaining an area's property values and historic value, and this is demonstrated over and over in Lexington and elsewhere. Not only does living in the H-1 district keep you from doing something to the outside of your property that negatively alters the character of your historic neighborhood, it keeps your neighbors from doing the same thing. And our restrictions, as mentioned before, are way less onerous than in many subdivisions. subdivisions. If you look around at our H-1 neighborhoods, the buildings that are in them that are obviously out of character or that have been altered in some strange, property-value-degrading way were done before the H-1 overlay was placed over those areas. Without the protection of the H-1 designation, those damaging intrusions would have just kept on coming. Our older neighborhoods are a major part of what makes Lexington unique, and that encourages people to want to locate here. Thus, our historic neighborhoods are a major economic asset. Protecting our heritage will keep it that way. Ashland Park is a treasure, and a part of our heritage we need to protect. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next is Carol Iverson. Okay. And next is Chris Smith and then Larry Smith. Is Chris Smith here? South Hanover? Okay. Larry Smith? Did I hear someone say he left? Okay. Kathy Reynolds? I'm Kathy Reynolds, and I live at 138 South Hanover. Most of what I had to say has already been said, so I won't repeat it, but I would like to address the area between Fontaine and Slashes that was under opposition, and that to me is the area that's being encroached on the most or has that possibility. A lot of students live on Fontaine. There's a lot of apartment houses in the area, and I just think it's, for all the reasons everybody else has said, it's very, very important and we would definitely appreciate your vote in favor. Thank you very much. Next is Melissa Wilson. Is Melissa here? Okay. And still working off of our lists. Next is Frank Harris. Glad to see some familiar faces. My name is Frank Harris. I live at 282 Old Kingston Road. I've lived in Lexington my entire, almost 51 years. This, I don't live in this neighborhood. This does not affect me directly, but it does affect me indirectly. The loss of freedom to the people that do not want this to happen is very offensive to me. To collectively take a zoned area and impose the tyranny of the majority on the minority is very offensive. That affects me in the future if somebody wants to come in and zone my neighborhood against my will. And so we're being punished by people that want to impose their values on other people without being exposed to the financial burdens such a zoning requirement would require. In my world, I value my neighbors more than I value my property. I like to get along with my neighbors. That means I get to do what I want on my property. They get to do what they want on theirs. In my world, if I wanted to save a historic home, I wouldn't require somebody not be allowed to sell it. I would purchase it and keep it the way I wanted to keep it. To force me to do something to your standards is the most un-American thing I can imagine in this country. Imposing a historic zoning on an area is nothing but a regressive tax on the poor. I would hate to be an elderly couple, an elderly person, in a home that I had resided in for 20, maybe 30 or 40 years, living on a fixed income, barely able to pay my bills, barely able to pay for food and utilities, and have to have these onerous burdens placed upon me to improve my property to someone else's standards, whether I wanted to or not. if you're going to give abatements for these people, then you're taxing the middle class. What I see is that these people want their property taxes artificially held high at the expense of other people. This is no different than giving special tax breaks to Exxon and big corporations. These are well-to-do people that want their property values artificially inflated at the expense of the taxpayer and done so at the point of a gun by the government. Thank you. Next is John Kemper, followed by Jenny Seville, followed by Sally O'Boyle. I am John Kemper. I live at 4413 Ravenscrest Lane. I don't know where to start. I didn't know we had such a crisis and were at such risk for our neighbors violating the sense of neighborhood standards. And it makes me concerned about where I live that I need a historical overlay, and I'm about a quarter of a mile from Ravens Run Wildlife Sanctuary, because what I'm hearing tonight is that this neighborhood is going to be purchased, demolished, and we're going to put up high-rise buildings there. I think what you're seeing here is, and I've talked to you all before about the PDR program and policies of the government and the insurance premium. What you're seeing is the infill policy running into your restriction of space to develop outside the urban services area. When you take 50,000 acres out of a 150,000-acre county, you create this kind of fear in folks living in the older infill areas. If I'm not correct, that's what these folks are saying. and the demand for land you want affordable housing as a builder i can't give you affordable housing on a thousand dollar linear foot lot sixty thousand dollars for a 60 by 120 lot the vinyl boxes folks are talking about are what people can afford at that rate versus the kind of homes that are downtown so if the land cost was lower by having more land in the development pool you might not have this kind of infill policy running into your green space conservatory policies. So in a way, I see the council over the years and the policies of the Fayette County government having created this push between two groups of citizens that live side by side, but yet have a fear of their neighbor. And to me, that's not good government. you have to provide ample space for folks to develop be able to buy what they want live the way they want and we're not doing that in fayette county i've lived here all my life and i've watched this council evolve i've watched the county evolve done business here watch the taxes go up on businesses watch people leave fayette county for other counties and i think all that rolls into affordable housing the kind of conflicts we have between historical overlays You know, those are fine homes down there. Everybody can't afford one of those. But then everybody wants to live in a certain area that the government dictates to us. So some of those policies might need a review to alleviate some of these future conflicts because, I don't know, we've been here, what, almost three hours tonight? I know you guys aren't having fun because I know some of you, and I see the expressions on your face, and we're not having fun out here looking at them, them looking at us. So if you can relieve this conflict, make everybody happy, everybody be reelected in two years, or the half of you that are running. Thank you. Jenny Saville. Thank you. You guys are pretty bad about not letting people do what they want with their own property, and that is a basic American principle that founded our country. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to preserve an historic look, when by the very act that you do that by, you destroy an historic principle of what it means to be an American. And that is the right. Property rights were a really big issue. We're not well-schooled in history, not by the public education sector. The property rights were a huge issue and part of the reason that people came here to escape tyranny. I also think that good ideas don't need force. I think when ideas are good that the community evolves around them and finds ways, peaceful, non-aggressive ways, which is not government. Government is not peaceful. It's not non-aggressive. And it's not inexpensive. I think that without the ties of the government, that the communities come together and find unique new ways to solve old problems. And you guys hinder that process. You always want Lexington to be growing and developing, but not in Jimmy Chase. We don't want any development or growth or anything new there. And then we get the sprawl problems out in the county where you can do new things. things like you're never going to resolve all these problems by having a small group of people like you guys telling everybody else what to do. Thank you. Next is Sally O. Boyle. I don't know if that's O or O. Boyle. She had to leave? Okay. Next is Adrienne Poliniak. She had to leave. And who are you? Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, and you pass. David Minks? You're next. Okay. Yes, did you want to speak? Yes, I did. Okay. Mary King wants to seat for three minutes. Can you say that at the microphone, please? Thank you. My name is David Minko. I live at 306 South Hanover. That is in the area that is under consideration here. And did you say someone wanted to? Mary King, she neglected to sign up, but she's there in the back. Okay, I need to ask our attorneys. Normally someone who's not signed up is not allowed to cede time. Can you give me some kind of ruling first on that? That's normally the way that it's handled. Now, are you wanting to cede your time? Is that what you were saying? Yes, Vice Mayor. All right. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay. Thank you very much. You'll have six minutes. Thanks, Madam Vice Mayor, and thanks, Council folks, for showing up for this special meeting. We know it's been a long day for you guys, typical half-day, 12-hour day. I'm opposed to H-1. It didn't start out that way. I attended numerous informative meetings where when I drilled down to the detail of what really would be involved in something as simple as replacing a window and started hearing about old wood versus new wood, the architectural integrity, some very amorphous type language as far as what I wouldn't be allowed to do with my property, I realized that the restrictions on me versus any small possible benefit of restricting what my neighbors could do that I would feel is not appropriate for their property turned me against H1. So my two main points I want to make are initially a postcard was sent out back in March, and there was a deadline to return it. I think it was two, three, four weeks, something like that. When the initial count came back, the numbers were that approximately 59%, call it 60% if we round up, of homeowners, 280 property owners in the affected area, actually responded. Of those 280 property owners, 100 of them or 99 of them are in Hanover Towers, which is 25% non-owner occupied or occupied by renters. There was a lot of debate amongst the Planning and Zoning Commission, should they even have been included, given that as a condo owner, you own from the paint in. I don't think they should have been included, but they were. But be that as it may, even including Hanover Towers, which I suspect was included because they anticipated a favorable response rate favoring H1, you only had a 60% response rate. And of that 60%, 115 were for it, 47 were against it. And again, this is the original, we'll call it a vote, but it was returning the little postcard. Subsequent to that, over the next seven to eight months, a number we had never seen before popped up at the last meeting. The pro-H1 folks have been out actively soliciting responses that are in favor of it. In other words, I've heard of early voting, I've never heard of late voting. So my first point is I ask you to table this and not go forward with the Planning and Zoning Committee's recommendation because three of the seven votes, if you check the minutes of the meeting, were by folks that said, well, when they added these extra 35 additional votes in favor of this that put them over the 51% of the 280 property owners, three of these folks at the Planning and Zoning Committee, when they did the final vote, cited, well, I guess the majority wants it. I'm going to vote for it. But in my opinion, it's a corrupted vote. It needs to be redone. I'm asking you to table this, and let's start again if the AP&A is so inclined to continue to pursue this, and let's get a more valid numbers or at least an even playing field where those opposed can also have an additional seven to eight months to attempt to get responses as opposing it. The other thing I want to point out is that the zoning committee, the subcommittee of the planning and zoning committee, voted against this for several reasons. They voted against it. So, again, this is not a unanimous thing. And, again, I think that 7-4 vote would come in question if we were to redo this and we didn't have that 51% number. So those, I think, are the two biggest things I want to address. As far as, I won't get into details about will property rights go up, will they go down. Property rights go up and down pretty much in tandem, whether you're H-1 zoned or not. And there's a lot of studies out there. If you go home and Google H-1 zoning and property values, I think you'll find a lot of biased studies out there that say, oh, it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Well, heck, if it was, why isn't everybody pushing for this H-1 zoning? Why hasn't there been a new H-1 zoned area added in quite some time? If it's so great, why wouldn't every old neighborhood want it? If it's such a no-brainer, hey, your property values go up. And there's been a lot of comparison to neighborhoods that I really don't think compare to this neighborhood. At best, if you approve this, which I strongly urge you not to, if you approve this, what you're going to get is a snapshot of what the neighborhood looked like in 2013, which, frankly, if you do a walk-around survey, 70% of the houses in this proposed area have additions slapped on them. They don't look exactly like what was proposed by the woman that spoke in favor of H-1, but there's additions, some of them doubling the size of the house. Not all of them are done in brick. If it's a brick house, they're done in hardy board or vinyl or something else. So the idea that this is going to make a wonderful preservation of what the Olmstead brothers intended, it's merely going to give you a snapshot of 2013. Lastly, I just want to say I hope you vote against it. Again, I think the prudent thing would be to do is to ask for another postcard reply where the deadlines were actually honored and late votes weren't accepted. And as I'm not in concert here with Mr. Vickroy, who I just met this evening, I've been involved in this process for 18 months, three separate occasions over the past nine months. I've proposed this car belt where about 80% of the people is slightly further south from what Mr. Vickroy proposed. It should be in the packet. Maybe it's not. I don't know. But I'll submit it into the record or I can give it to you. Yes, if you'll give it to the clerk, please. She'll enter it into the record. Thank you. And obviously that carve-out area includes my house. It's about 80% of us down in that southern part of South Hanover and Fontaine do not want H1. So thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next is J.C. Van Meter followed by Keith White. If you'll give us your name and address, please, and you'll have three minutes. I'm Jim Van Meter. I live at 211 South Hanover. I'm here to speak against the proposal. The reasons adduced in support of the proposition by its proponents, at least those relevant to the historic zoning criteria, boil down to the following. Ashland Park has historic significance since it was part of Henry Clay and his family's estate. The layout of Ashland Park has architectural significance since it was designed by the Olmstead brother firm, a firm with a very venerable record. And Ashland Park, in the words of the criteria, have distinguished characteristics of an architectural style. but what bothers me about all of this is it's not Ashland Park that you're being asked to think about the thing that worries me is the same thing that worried Councilman Beard and some of his colleagues there's an arbitrary completely arbitrary line that's been drawn down the middle of what was Ashland Park and half of the area about half of it is before you now is the basis for this proposal and the other half is being ignored. It's very much in my mind as if the curator of a museum found a piece of art that he thought had significance, developed an argument for the authenticity of the piece, for its provenance, and then decided to cut the thing in half and conserve only half of it. That's what I think you're being asked to do. Whatever historic and architectural values Ashland Park has in here in the whole and are undermined by protecting only half of it, by splitting it in half and by protecting only half. Let me give you some examples. Clay Lancaster, a respected architectural historian who wrote widely about Lexington and Ashland Park, states in an article published in 1899 that the slashes which cuts across the streets of Ashland Park and ties them together is, and I'm quoting now, the outstanding feature of the layout. End of quote. So the proposal being considered would split the splashes with most of it being in the area excluded from H-1 designation. Those common areas, as those of you who know something about the Olmstead work, those common areas are very characteristic of what they did. You can think about what he did in Louisville, what they did with the Riverside area along the De Plains River in Chicago, with Llewellyn Park in Orange, New Jersey. Those common areas are very, very characteristic of the Olmstead. And what you're doing here, if you approve this approval, is cutting that at its heart. Mr. Van Meter, your time is up. Thank you for being here. Perhaps you would indulge me since I've listened to these lawyers. The council would have to make a motion to change your time. It's our council rule. I encourage you to make the BOLAR go back and do their work. Thank you so much for you, Mr. Van Meter. Reject this and come forward with a proposal. I'd like to yield my permission, Mr. Van Meter. And who might you be? Mr. Kearns. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Kearns has given you his three minutes. Thank you, Mr. Kearns. As for the architectural features in Ashland Park, Mr. Lancaster, in the same article, states that the integration of bungalow and landscape design in Ashland Park is quite consummate. If Ashland Park has a distinguishing architectural characteristic, it's bungalow. The other structures in the area are of a hodgepodge of styles. The majority of the bungalows in Ashland Park, however, are in the area excluded from what's being proposed for H-1 designation. I think the proposal now before the Council would be destructive of the area's historical and architectural integrity. to set up one set of rules for half of Ashland Park, another set of rules for the other half, is invidious to begin with. Ashland Park should be treated as a whole, as it was conceived, and either designated H-1 in its entirety or allowed to develop without governmental or more bureaucratic intervention, which it's done very nicely with for the last hundred years. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Van Meter. Keith White, followed by Jim Tucker. You yield me the rest of your time. I will be sure. Thank you. Now, okay, what is the request, please? He's going to yield me the rest of his time. Jenny Brown had to go pick her son up, and she asked me if I would request her three minutes. I won't take that much time. Okay, so Jenny Brown, you're... She had to go pick her son up. She's not in the chamber? No, she had to go pick her son up. So her time can't be given because she's not here, but someone else's time you're taking. Who is that? Another two minutes. Okay, another two minutes, so you'll have five minutes. Okay. My name is Keith White. My wife Tanya and I have lived at 1015 Slashes Road for 39 years, which is a borderline property. we have belonged to the Ashland Neighborhood Association which is the area that you ask about why it has not been included because we voted it down we know the consequences of the historic overlay so our neighborhood association voted it down that's the reason they didn't include us into this area of all of Ashland Park my wife and I have been have belonged to the Ashland Neighborhood Association for over 30 years. We voted down this proposal once before in our Neighborhood Association. My wife is currently on the board, and she has been on the board previously as well. We have never belonged to the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association nor attended any meetings or functions. my wife and I were never notified or asked to participate in our early planning for H-1 overlay by the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association. I had no opportunity to voice my views concerning the proposed H-1 overlay until we received cards to vote for it or against it. We are not the only borderline property owners from the Ashland Neighborhood Association being coerced by the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association into the H-1. There's around 35 of us. And we're supposed to have had a representative here to Ken Kurtz was supposed to come, and I don't know whether he presented you all with a paper or what in protest of it, trying to reclaim us who are in the Ashland Neighborhood Association back out of the proposed overlay. I'm concerned over the railroading process preceding tonight's meeting. I've been to all the public hearings, but I was never contacted to be part of or to attend to any of the Ashland Park neighborhood meetings concerning the H-1. All the property owners should have been invited during the early stages of planning. Why is there a rush? Why did they close secret meetings? Why are they? This process is seriously flawed. I ask that this be tabled and reevaluated at a later date. A new survey by the city government with all property owners involved, and them being notified by certified mail is in order at this time. A new unbiased survey by the city government with at least 60% of all property owners should be a minimum for a majority. The currently flawed survey with a weak 51% majority of those who responded is not a majority. Unresponding property owners who cannot be counted as a yes vote. And how do we know they were ever really contacted? Unless you have a certified letter, you don't know. You're just taking hearsay as to whether they were actually contacted or whether they were voted or not. Hanover Towers should have no votes, much less the 30 that they acquired from the Hanover Towers. They're not even historic. Some of the no votes were miscounted as yes votes. That's been in the last meeting we had. That was documented in that. And some of the yes vote cards were counted after the implied cutoff date. So how can this flawed survey even be considered and have reached this point is beyond my imagination. The vote no and start a new process which involves all property owners, It's not just taking those who responded as a majority. It's not a majority, and it's not right. I've written a bunch of notes here. You have 20 seconds. We have city agencies to control neighborhood changes that are already in existence, city planning, zoning, code enforcement, building inspecting. and others, and you can take Ted Mims when he proposed to build down on Euclid, the high rise down the corner of Euclid and High Street. They struck him down on that, and that's not a historic area. So these concerns can be addressed without an H-1 overlay. Mr. White, your time is up. Thank you. Thank you very much. This be tabled until an honest, unbiased government survey is taken. Thank you very much. Thank you. Jim Tucker, followed by Mary Minko, Anita Matten. The real ballgame doesn't start until the second half anyway. Pardon me? What did you say? I'm sorry, I missed that. The real ballgame doesn't start until the second half anyway. Okay. Thank you, Vice Mayor, Council Members, for allowing me the time to speak. My name is Jim Tucker, and my wife, Mary Pfister, and I reside at 321 Deshay Road. We're against a proposed H-1 overlay. While the reasons of opposition are many, I would like to dwell on a few of them. Would not like to dwell on them as much as try to present some issues that beg to be addressed. I made some notes. First off, I hope we all realize that an H1 overlay is not a cure-all. We realize that. And we also realize, or must realize, that I can take my house, do no work on the outside of it, create a duplex out of it, and it's within the zoning laws. An H1 overlay will not prevent that. We just need to keep these things in mind. The talk of tearing houses down, bulldozing them and building new ones, you know, rarely does somebody pay $250,000, $350,000, $400,000 for a structure, tear it down and put up student housing. I don't see that happening here. Ladies and gentlemen, the streets of Deshaies Road, South Hanover, Slashes, Fincastle, and Fontaine are truly special. As stated in the designation report of Ashton Park on page 27, it's in the folder, the historic homes in the study area were remarkably intact, retaining their architectural character that reflects almost a pattern book sample of successful architectural styles in the area. Editions were built, porches were altered, and other changes made. It also notes further in the finding that the neighborhood area of this proposal has changed with the times while overall maintaining the character that defines it. Over 75% of the homes, existing homes, have additions that were built without the encumbrances of an H-1 overlay, and I doubt an overlay would improve on what my neighbors have already done. I am proud of what my neighbors have done and all they have been able to accomplish with regards to their individual property improvements. Our property values have gone up like everyone else's, especially since improvements were made and the housing market as a whole has increased in value since 1997. I highly doubt a historic overlay would improve on that. Ashland, Henry Clay's historic home, is bounded by the streets of Richmond Road, Fincastle Road, Woods Point, and Sycamore Road. This home is a beautiful, remarkably intact historic estate that is a national landmark. None of the surrounding streets are in the proposed historic overlay. Why is that? The good folks of the historic preservation will tell you that it's because the other neighborhood association is involved and they haven't applied for H-1 designation. It seems silly to me to propose an H-1 overlay for streets that are six blocks away and not the streets that are closest to the very heart of this entire neighborhood, the Ashland Estate. To me, good planning would be to have the whole neighborhood be addressed and involved in making this a neighborhood of historic substance. Mr. Tucker, your time's over. Thank you very much for coming. I've got a great closing statement. Next is Mary Minko, and followed by, is Mary here? I've seen it much, I'm already tonight speaking. Oh, yes. Okay. And then Anita Matten. I'm here, I'll pass. You're passing? Okay. Richard Moffler, I'm sorry. Okay. And Aaron Eisenhower. No. Hello. Welcome. My name is Aaron Eisenhower. I live at 233 Deshaies. I've lived there for the past four years restoring my property. My wife and I were able to buy this property due to its dilapidated state and poor garage. and I'm currently the owner of Eisenhower Incorporated, a construction company that my grandfather, Richard Eisenhower, started in the 1960s. My grandfather is an architect and was a contemporary Lexington architect and brought many modern homes of modern style to Lexington. I still run the company and I'm very proud of his vision and mine. I mention this only because you've heard a testimony from Wilson Eastland about his bad experience. This bad experience he speaks of is my new garage. I'm sorry that Mr. Eastland does not find modern architecture appealing, even though the addition off the back of his house is a two-story wood-siding flat roof structure similar to my new garage. As much as people differ about the H1 overlay, I think everyone will agree that the developers of our neighborhood did not think about the accessory structures and the demands that we would have as modern humans. Many of the original garages were not built to the same craftsmanship of our houses. When I moved into my house, our garage had holes in the roof. There was no foundation. It was practically falling over. I could not even get homeowner's insurance until we tore the garage to the ground. I do not agree with Mr. Eastland that my garage is an eyesore. It was constructed using cedar siding, expensive construction techniques, and it has ten windows. I feel that all disagreements between neighbors should be resolved face-to-face. This is the first mention I've even heard of his problem with my structure and my property. I thank you for your time. I just felt like I had to stick around to stick up for myself and for modern architecture and its place in historic neighborhoods. I feel like that it can enhance our lives and how it can, and many different views of architecture are acceptable. It's not just one style of house or one style of architecture that's appropriate. And I feel like that even under historic zoning that my garage would still be able to be built. I feel like that there should be a place for modern architecture in these historic zones. So thank you. Thank you very much. And then the last name was Jenny Brown, and I believe you all said she had left. Okay, thank you very much. All right, that finishes our list of individual speakers. And, Council members, this is the last opportunity you'll have for questions. Once this segment of your questions is finished, I'll close the hearing, and then it'll be simply discussion about moving forward on any kind of adoption of findings of fact. Are there any questions? Council member, oh, I've had a request for one more five-minute recess, and I'm seeing some yeses. So we'll take a five-minute recess if you'll be back by 20 till 10. Thank you. Okay, now, before we... Okay, next is, Council Members, this is your opportunity to ask any questions that you didn't get to ask before. And then I'll close the hearing. And once the hearing is closed, there will be no more questions. But council members will have an opportunity to express their opinions. Okay. Now, we have a couple of council members who have questions. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Vice Mayor. A two-part question for planning staff and historic preservation staff. Thank you for the opportunity to hear the views of both sides, pros and cons, of the residents here today. but it's in regards to process and the initiation. I just wanted to confirm that the requested H-1 overlay was initiated by residents or a group of residents in the impacted area. Is that correct? Yes, sir. The Ashland Park Neighborhood Association is the initiate of the application. The way the process works is an interested body contacts the Division of Historic Preservation. There's a series of informational meetings where we go to the requesting body to give them information about what is covered by the H-1 regulations, what it means to be an H-1 overlay. They present us with what they are looking at as a boundary, and we do provide some technical advice at that point. In this particular case, the boundaries requested were by the neighborhood association, their neighborhood association boundaries. Now the zoning ordinance, Article 13, calls for definable logical boundaries, perimeter boundaries. These informational meetings and at meetings with the representatives of the association, the leadership, the preservation staff did look at and suggest that they consider looking at more logical or more definable boundaries, basically the development plans, the neighborhood as it developed from the homestead plan, from the development plats, those kinds of things. So they did extend a little bit beyond where they initially started. The neighborhood was not interested or did not pursue going more towards the Irving, McDowell, Sycamore area, but they did adjust what they initially requested to look at the development pattern, development plans from 1908, 1919, 1922, to establish the north, west, and south boundaries without going to the east. And therefore, that is what was presented ultimately to the Planning Commission for their initiation of this request. And that's the boundary that the Planning Commission chose to establish. And once that boundary was established by the Planning Commission at the initiation, that was what we were charged to look at. Okay. So, again, it was not initiated by the Irma County government. This particular H-1 overlay was initiated by concerned residents in the impacted area. Yes, sir. That's one. My last question along those lines, and this really makes a real difference to me, is that is it correct, Randy and Bill and staff members, is that it is not the policy of the urban county government to initiate overlays. no matter if that's not out could you speak to that bill randy you've answered my question in regards to this overlay but i'm just trying to get a context a context almost every overlay zone is initiated either by the planning commission or by this body and that's once it gets past the stage that mr ship was talking about where neighborhood's thinking about, they're exploring, they're thinking about the where's and maybe what they'll ask for. Once they move beyond that point, as this neighborhood did, and get to the point, we want to ask for an ND1 overlay or an H1 overlay. Almost all of those are initiated by the government. Well, let me clarify. I'm sorry. But it always starts out where Randy indicated. It is not, let me rephrase, it is not the policy of the government. to petition neighborhoods to seek their interest in starting the process of an H-1 overlay. That has not been the case during my career. I'll certainly let Historic Preservation answer as well. The Division of Historic Preservation by ordinance is not allowed to go out and say, we think this neighborhood should be one, this should be one. It has to start with a concerned citizen, a group, a recognized organization. Even the Urban County Council can make the initial request to ask us to look at it. But as the Division of Historic Preservation, we do not go out and recruit. Very good. Thank you so much. Thank you, Vice Mayor. That answers my question. You're welcome. Council Member Massadi. I guess, Mr. Shamblin, if you wouldn't mind coming to the podium, I have a quick question. And I'm not sure you can answer this or not, but I'm assuming you can. There's been some concern that has been brought forward as far as the counting of how the votes were counted or how the citizens were notified. Some were notified, some weren't. Some received postcards, some didn't. Can you kind of tell me how the process was initiated and how it was followed through, please? Sure. To the best of my ability, I'll do that. I think this was the first time ever that the Planning Commission had a postcard ballot on the issue of H-1, and the Planning Commission sent out postcards to 283 property owners. And of those, they received 204 in return, 204 responses. Thirty-seven of the responses came in after the deadline, but the deadline was extended because some people didn't get the original postcard or were out of town or whatever reason they didn't respond to it. And we asked, I personally asked Tracy Wade of the Planning Commission. She was pretty much directing the activity of this particular matter. I asked her if it would be permissible for them to send their postcards in after the deadline, and she came back to me later and said yes, they would accept postcards up until the date of the hearing before the commission. So we, as I said, there were 37 additional cards that came in after the fact, And to the best of my recollection, 35 of those were in favor and two were opposed. It didn't, well, it changed, obviously changed the vote to some degree, but there was still a wide majority in the first response in favor of the H-1 request. Does that clarify it for you? Yes, I was just, there's been a lot of concern. Yes, sir, would you like to come speak? No. Do you have a question for him? This is the time for Council to ask questions of people. I will ask. Thank you, Mr. Chamberlain. I guess I will ask this gentleman, because you had brought up that point that there was a concern about that. Yeah, my concern is if Mr. Chamberlain requested from Tracy Wade an extension, it was never communicated to me. I was in touch with Tracy Wade. I have an email right here that shows the vote results in May that she sent me that don't match up with the 35 extra pro votes. And the reason they're important is, as I mentioned, three of the seven committee members that voted for this, and the reason you're even considering it, cited the fact that 51% of the 283 property owners were in favor of it. It's not 51% if those extra 37 votes aren't counted. So, again, there was no notification to me, I was in contact with Tracy Wade, or the opponents of H-1, that there was an extension where we could try to lobby and get additional votes for another seven, eight months. Okay, thanks. Did that finish your questions? Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I have a couple follow-ups on that line. First, the towers that were spoken of, I don't know who best answered this question. How many units are in that tower or towers? Ninety-nine? Can you please go to the podium, Mr. Reverend Dr. Sessom? Ninety-nine units there. Two are commercial, so 97 are residents. Okay. Are they owner-occupied? Do you know what breakdown is owner-occupied out of 97? How many are owner-occupied? Yes, sir. There are 23% of absentee owners, and of the 23, I think it's 16 or 17 are rented. The rest are used by families of the owners. Okay. And then for the purpose of the count, was the tower counted as one property, or was it counted as 99 properties? Oh, there he is right in front of me. Postcards were sent to each of the condominium owners in the tower, so there were an additional 99. The postcards were used to inform the commission in May prior to their decision as to whether or not to initiate the zone change to an H-1. That was the purpose they were sent then. Okay. And you may have the answer to this question. the extension of the deadline, were the extra whatever the number was that came in after the extension, were those folks solicited by the neighborhood to respond, or did the commission reach back out to those who didn't respond with the second postcard? I'm not sure about the first part of your question. The second part did not happen. the Planning Commission's decision in May was to initiate so there was no other activity by the planning staff on the postcards. Okay. Sir, I forgot your name, sir. Yes, sir. Mr. Shamblin. Thank you. Yes, sir. Could you, maybe you can answer the question. I don't know if you don't. That's okay. But do you know if there was an additional solicitation by the neighborhood for those who didn't respond originally? I do not. Or what caused them to suddenly respond when the deadline was extended? Well, I didn't handle that particular matter. Other people did, so I really am not certain of the answer. But to the best of my knowledge, they were not solicited. They notified members of our board that they had not received the postcard or had neglected to send it in, or they were out of town when it came for whatever reason. They were late. They didn't meet the original deadline. And when it came to our board's attention, I then asked Ms. Wade of the Planning Commission, who had been on liaison on that if it would be permissible for postcards to come in because of the reasons that I just stated. And she came back to me, and she may have talked to Mr. Sally, I don't know. But anyway, she came back to me and said, yes, it would be permissible up until the date of the hearing for additional postcards to come in. So do you know, then, if somebody from your organization solicited those folks to go ahead and submit those postcards? I do not know of that. Okay. My final question is, was it 150 to 50? Was that the original vote? I'm seeing heads shaking yes. Well, that was the vote at the end after the additional 37 postcards came in, which 35 were in favor and two opposed. So that final vote was coincidentally a round number of 150 in favor, 50 opposed, and four with no opinion. And that final vote included the 37 cards that came in after the original deadline. Okay. So there's a total of 204 properties? 204, yes, sir. How many of the total vote, whether it was for or against, were from the Tower? I don't have that number. Maybe our secretary at the time has that, but I do not have it. Okay. That's my final question. If someone can put that together, there may be other questions. There's another council member up, so if you could put that number together and come back with it, that would be fine. Yeah, I can tell you how many were on South Hanover Avenue, which includes Hanover Towers, but I can't tell you specifically how many came from Hanover Towers. Okay. I think she's going to see if she can figure that out. The gentleman that said that we voted against the H-1 overlay in their neighborhood, could you come up with just for a second? The map that I had put up earlier that showed where Ashton Estate is currently and then where the target area is, where do you guys, where is your association that voted against H-1 located in that? I live at 1015 Slashes Road, which is a cutout. Can you ask them to put it on the Elmo, please? What is your neighborhood boundary, though, that voted against H-1? My neighborhood association that I live in and have been in for over 30 years is the Ashland Neighborhood Association. I live on Slashes Road, the very last cutout on Slashes Road. He has a pointer for you, sir. He's got a pointer. I'll tell you. I live right there. I don't see it. I'm the last. You see, well, they cut out. My mother lived next door, and she was in Ashland Neighborhood Association for 18 years. And they also have taken Ken Kurtz from our neighborhood association, Ashland Neighborhood Association. I was supposed to have been here with a letter. I don't know whether he came or not. I couldn't contact him. He's my next-door neighbor. But he told me that they have taken 35 of us from the Ashland Neighborhood Association and drug us into their proposed H-1 overlay. And unknown to me, unknown, unable to go to any meetings or know about any of the meetings or anything about this outside of the public meetings. Sir, excuse me, Council Member Myers said that you had answered his question about where you live and what neighborhood. I guess if someone, I think that's new information that we're just now hearing, that they've included residents that had previously voted against H-1 into that boundary. I'd just like to ask if that's correct. That was from our neighborhood association, Ashland Neighborhood Association that I belong to. In one of our general meetings in our neighborhood association, the topic came up and we voted it down within our neighborhood association. They drug myself along with 30-some other out of my neighborhood association into their neighborhood association without our knowledge, prior knowledge or any of our input to my knowledge. I never had any. And those properties are included in the target area? Yes, yes, 35 of them are in the H-1 overlay. All this is totally false. If you want to take a vote on this, it ought to be by certified mail. That's the only legitimate way. How can you trust their count when they miscounted votes, they miscounted some no votes as yes votes, they extended the deadline and took another 35 pro votes? Did you get your answer to your questions? Thank you very much, sir. Thank you. Okay, Council Member Henson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Bill, when all of the cards and the voting process is handled by your office, correct? All the postcards, yes, ma'am. And they come back to you. So is there any way that, in your opinion, that that could be flawed? The purpose of the postcards is to demonstrate to the Commission before they agree to begin this long process that there is significant support for what's being requested. The postcards at the May meeting when the commission initiated the request had 114 did not respond of the $283. 117 were in support. 48 were in opposition. and four indicated no opinion. Of those, in Hanover Towers, the staff received 51 postcards from the nearly 100 sent. 41 were in favor. It does not say how many had no opinion or in opposition. The response rate was almost 60% of all the cards sent. It came back by May when the commission made their decision to initiate the request. This map that you showed us, even without the towers, and you look, if you count it as only one property, the green outweighs the opposition. If you take out the white for no response and the yellow for no opinion, the green is four and red is opposition. That's right. So the green far outweighs the red, even without the tower, correct? The two maps, the one shown to the commission in May and then the one that you had before you that was shown at the planning commission meeting in October, all had more green on it than red. And your office generated this map? Yes, ma'am. The only trouble I have is the distinguishment between the two greens. The difference is the ones that were received by May and the ones after, yes. And the gentleman that was talking about where his neighborhood was added, is that correct? My understanding is the neighborhood boundary, as the two neighborhoods have informed the GIS department, that there is a small area of what on the map shows as the Ashland neighborhood in this area that you're being reviewing. It's not a perfect match with the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association boundary on the GIS layer. Okay. But this is the map for the H1. Yes. And it looks like to me on slashes, most everyone was in favor except for two. Correct? The green and the red, I don't have that in front of me, but yeah. It would be one of those two shades. Okay. Thank you. You're very welcome. Council Member Kaye. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Bill, one more time. Could you walk us through one more time the actual process for determining the boundaries? So I want to start with what the neighborhood came to the staff with, what then went to the Planning Commission, what came out of the Planning Commission, and what we now have before us, if you could. I'll be glad to try. The planning staff received a request from the Neighborhood Association for an H-1 overlay to be considered. I'm looking for the date. I thought I had marked it in my notes. And at that point, they were proposing some boundaries, or they were saying generally we wanted to be our, so the boundaries that they proposed were? I believe I have the original letter. Let me put that on the overhead. That might help. I'll enter this letter into the record in case it isn't already. It's received March 13th from the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association. It's titled Letter of Application for H-1 Zoning. It's dated March 10th, and I will put the map on the overhead for you. Thank you. what is that do you want to tell us what we're looking at yeah let me go it looks like in terms of a boundary yeah i'll outline it here with my highlighter of course this is high street so the boundary is here That's the boundary on this map That's better I'm going to walk around that one more time So the differences between that and the map that we're now looking at includes more properties on Fontaine. Is that correct? Am I reading this right? I am not sure there's any difference in this map and that one. I believe the boundary is the same. I'm map impaired. I have a hard time reading maps. So the proposed boundaries that came from the neighborhood are the same boundaries that we now have before us. I believe that's correct. Yes, so the map that is currently up on the screen is identical to what was initiated and is in the designation report and the boundaries before us tonight. Okay. So is it fair to say that the staff of the historic preservation of the – I'm not going to get your name right. Historic Preservation. Historic Preservation reviewed those boundaries, determined that they were appropriate, forwarded that recommendation with those boundaries to the Planning Commission, which then initiated. No. No, sir. Once again, the Neighborhood Association came to the Division of Historic Preservation requesting information about the H-1 process, which we went to informational meetings. They showed us their initial boundaries, which was their Neighborhood Association boundaries that weren't already covered by the South Ashland Central Avenue H1 overlay because the Neighborhood Association crosses that line as well. When was that? We've got a date. Their letter is March 13. Was this before then? Yes, sir. It would have been back in 2011 when the informational meeting started. Thank you. It was purely procedural information. We looked at their boundaries and told them that while the ordinance is written, you have to come up with some really good definable boundaries. Again, we recommended that they look at the development plans, which is where the Richmond Road, the rear property lines of the west side of South Hanover, and then along East High and the rear property lines on the south side of Fontaine, those all match the original Olmstead Plan, the 1919 and 1922 development plans. Those were more readily definable, defendable boundaries instead of just a neighborhood association. However, they were not willing to proceed, for lack of a better direction, to the east towards the Irving and McDowell and pick up the rest of what I would call Ashland No. 1. But they did look at and decide to submit and request the boundaries that you see there. So is it fair to say that that set of boundaries came from conversations with the neighborhood and your staff about what were a defensible set of boundaries? And that's the map we have in front of us. Ultimately, the Neighborhood Association decided to choose this boundary, and that is what they submitted to the Planning Commission for initiation. We are not allowed to submit from our Division of Historic Preservation. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Bill, I'm troubled about two things. And I'll start with Hanover Towers. It obviously is not historic. It doesn't meet the test of being in concert with the rest of the homes, residences. within this area. It looks like it was brought in to load the count a little bit in the favor of the H-1 overlay. Not by U-Haul, obviously, but I'm just saying that that was an idea that somebody dreamed up anyway, and it just doesn't fit the situation at all. It's strange to me. The other thing that bothers me is that this neighborhood association has done a preemptive strike on every other entity in what is truly Ashland Park. Ashland Park extends all the way up Fontaine to Shenanue Road. Take it right on Shenanue Road and go to Hart. Hart was mentioned by the way. Henry Clay's wife was a Hart. Down Hart to Cochran and around and comes out by Billy's Barbecue. I believe Chenault Road also is in that same. And the original Platts will show this. The two years I spent at McDowell Road and then the 23 years I spent in the 300 block of Cheney gives me some feel for what was going on over there. Dudley, Ridgeway were all part of the situation. I don't know what, if they wanted to do this, I don't know what they'd call it. They couldn't call it Ashland Park again. Ashland Park 2, Ashland Park 3, Ashland Park ABCD. You're going to have to invent some if they want to expand and do H-1 themselves. Those are what troubled me, and I wanted my colleagues to understand where I'm coming from. Thank you, Mayor. Vice Mayor, pardon me. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just wanted to clarify. I think it was John Rohrer who spoke earlier, and I have your letter here in support of the application. And I believe it was you that said that we as a body here tonight are to look at the map, I guess, and the areas that has been petitioned to us to determine whether this area meets the qualifications of a historic district. And so the boundaries of that or all of those things, We just are supposed to look at this map and say whether it meets the criteria that is set forth in the ordinance, correct? I guess I would say that was my position from the Historic Preservation Commission standpoint. That's what came to us initially as the proposal. That's what has flowed through to the VOAR, to the Planning Commission, and to you. And it's been a uniform, consistent proposal and application that each of those bodies has looked at to determine whether or not the property boundary and the properties within the boundary meet the criteria that you all established that it needed to meet in order to become an historic district. So it may be a point-to-point-to-point statement, but that's the way I presented it to you. Well, I just wanted to make sure that I heard that correctly and that we have a lot of paper here and a lot of maps and a lot of questions. And so I just want to make sure that I'm focused on the right things. That's my understanding. I'm just a citizen lawyer that got appointed to the commission. Well, thank you. That's my thought. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I guess I would take issue with that because we just heard Mr. Salley acknowledge that the towers don't fit today as a nation for historic or an H-1. This is a question. And also we're looking at a letter. Is this a question? I'm sorry. Yeah. Oh, okay. So actually, Councilman Rakers just gave me a letter that we had when we were talking about the question of these other properties that were added in there, whether they were in there originally or whether they were added in later. And it says in here, this is the packet that we got today when we got to the meeting, Ashland Neighborhood Association Incorporated. It's received January 22, 2003 on the cover. The fourth paragraph down, it says, Originally the ANA did not take a position on the H-1 designation for our neighboring area. the Ashton Park neighborhood, but merely sought the exclusion of the 35 properties contained within the Ashton neighborhood, which is, I think, what the gentleman in the back was speaking about, those 35 properties that were put in here that weren't originally in the request from the neighborhood. And then it goes on to say that, however, we are now willing to support the application on the condition that the eight properties in the interior, not on the edges of the Ashton neighborhood, be removed from consideration as follows, and then it gives those out. So I guess I'm having trouble supporting this because of it goes. Did you have a question? I'm so sorry. We're going to have time to discuss our opinions, but did you have a question? Okay, then I would like a clarification on one point. These 35 properties, were they originally submitted by the neighborhood in the very beginning or after the preservation group got together with them and they said to reconsider the boundary based on something that's more defensible, is that when the 35 properties were brought in? And I'd also like the gentleman in the back who said he's one of those property owners to answer as well. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Mr. Shamblin. Okay, and I want the gentleman in the back to speak as well. Yes, sir. Go ahead. Yes, sir. Okay. The process, the 37 postcards that I was talking about earlier that came in, that were approved by the Planning Commission, is that? I think he's talking about something different. Okay. So if we could go back, Council Member Myers, and if you can ask your question. I think I'd ask the gentleman here that's behind you. He stated that 35 properties were bought into this, and he was one of them and didn't know about it. My question is, were those 35 properties in the original request from the original Neighborhood Association, or did they come in after having met with historic preservation and they talked about a more defensible boundary? I believe we were in the initial request, the 35 properties that you're asking about. But those 35 properties belong to the Ashland Neighborhood Association. Thank you very much. They are not members of the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association, so they have drugged us out of our neighborhood association in with theirs unbeknownst to us. And that's what my complaint is, in fact. Thank you, sir. Excuse me, sir. Excuse me, sir. The question, I think we've got to keep a little order in our council questioning. And I think, Council Member Myers, did you get an answer to your question? Yes, ma'am. If I could ask one follow-up question from the people who sent the postcards out. Yes. Since they were included in the original request, did they also get the postcard when the original postcards went out? This is a question for Mr. Sally. Excuse me, sir. This is for Mr. Sally. Yes, Council Member Myers. When the postcards were sent, these 35 were also notified. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Madam Chairman. Appreciate everyone's patience. I'd just clarify my response. to the gentleman. The process was that we took the recommendations of the Historic Preservation Commission on the boundaries and supported those boundaries, which included the 35 homes in question. We meaning the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association. Okay. Did that answer your question, Mr. Myers? Okay, that's where I was confused because I thought that it was after you met with them that they said change it to that. So does the process happen where they originally came to you guys and said, we're looking at doing this, what would the correct boundary be? Well, again, in the informational meetings that we had with the Neighborhood Association, they presented an idea, and we again told them that they should look at tying it to a more definable boundary instead of a neighborhood association is drawn at different times, but development patterns, which is one of the criteria that we look at, is not tied to a neighborhood association. It is tied to the actual development pattern, the development plans, the historic development. So we suggested, but it was strictly up to them to decide what boundaries they were going to submit to the Planning Commission to request for the initiation. Okay, that's what I was having a hard time understanding. When you said that you talked to them about a more defensible boundary, I thought that meant that they presented something to you, and you guys said, you ought to look at this instead of that. But it's kind of a conversation. We didn't present a hard boundary. It was conversation over time, but we had them look at, and they decided that they were more identifiable boundaries. I think you said earlier in a statement that they chose not to go further out to cover all of Ashland Park. Yes. Could either one of you elaborate on that conversation as to why you didn't want to do that? I'll have to defer to the Neighborhood Association for that reasoning. Sir? Well, we represent our membership within the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association. As has been pointed out, Ashland Neighborhood Association is a separate organization which encompasses a lot of the area on the other side of the Henry Clay Estate. And we discussed this with historic preservation staff representatives as to what would be the logical boundaries for our neighborhood to support. and this was what we came up with in concert with historic preservation was the boundaries that were submitted. We didn't feel that we could go further than we did. Did you guys have any conversations with the other neighborhood association in that other boundary or residents over there to say, this is what we're looking at doing here, this might help you guys too, you want to join in with this? We had conversations after the process started as to whether or not they would support our efforts. And I personally spoke with the president of the organization. He said that he would meet with his board and get back to us, which they recently did with the new president of the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association. but I think they are divided on their board and maybe in their membership as to where they stand on this issue at this time. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. I don't see any other council members with questions. Is that the case? Yes, Mr. Myers. One more question. Thank you. I have one more question for historic preservation. I realize that it's not our policy to initiate these kinds of things, but we have a comp plan and we've got all these different documents. Does your office have a position or a vision for these kinds of things so that when a group like this comes to you and says, we'd like to do this, and then you look at the fact that there's Ashland Park out there too, and then you guys kind of say, well, hey, why don't we contact the Southern Neighborhood Association and see if we can do this entire area, because historically that would make sense. Well, as I had mentioned earlier, we are not permitted by ordinance to recruit. The Division of Historic Preservation is not permitted to recruit. The request, the initiation, the questions, the request for information has to come from outside of our office. We respond to those, but we do not initiate and we are not allowed to initiate. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Are there any other questions? Council members? No? All right. Thank you very much, and I now declare the hearing is closed. and before we go on to council opinions and adoption of any findings of facts, I want to thank everyone in the chamber for being here and taking time out of your schedule to express your opinions and to, for some of you, what was very important to miss a big blue game. So thank you for being here. It's tied. Okay. And I want to thank our planning staff and our historic preservation staff and the attorneys who are here. So thank you very much. Now, the hearing is closed. And, Council Members, unless you choose to change our rules, each Council Member will have the option to speak twice. And each time will be five minutes. And that's it. Unless you vote to change our rules. And so this is the time for you to express your opinions. So if you'll log on, please. And any motions that you want to bring forward. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm not prepared to submit a motion at this time, but I do want to reflect on kind of what I've heard and where I think it leaves us. I agree with Mr. Rohrer about what our job is here. We are sitting as a quasi-judicial body, which is different for this council. We're not making judgments independent of the whole set of statutes and regulations. And Mr. Rohrer said that our responsibility was to look at the zoning ordinance and what it says and then to ask ourselves whether this petition meets the requirements of that zoning ordinance. And in addition, I would add that I distinguish between kind of information, arguments, opinions, whatever, that are relevant when you are talking to your friends and neighbors about whether they ought or ought not to support this kind of a petition. So in those conversations, I think it's relevant to talk about property values. It's relevant to talk about the burden that might be placed on the property owners. It's relevant to talk about many of those things. I don't personally believe that those are the relevant questions before us tonight. I believe that, in fact, what we have here is citizens coming to petition their government for a property right. There is a zoning regulation that says you have the right to petition your government for an overlay, and you have a right to have this body judge whether your petition meets the zoning regulations as they now exist. I believe that case has been made in the affirmative, and so I will support the petition. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Council Member Lawless. Excuse me. Thank you. I have one of the sad things about these kind of zone changes is H1 and ND1 is how it does become so divisive and neighbors against neighbors, and certainly this is the first one of these hearings we've had. Also, the Ellsford Neighborhood Association, for instance, covers a very large area, and there are H-1 zones within that, but it doesn't include all of them. And as far as this particular, and I have supporters and respect for people and friends on both sides of the issue, but what I have seen happen in the third district breaks my heart. and there is something to be said about that first stopping point before you get to the next level. And I would love for council members to go through the third district with me and see what has happened. And when you look at excluding those on North Hanover that voted against it, that's the gateway to the neighborhood. You lose the gateway, you lose the neighborhood. And I have seen neighborhoods absolutely be destroyed. And people who, you know, water quality issues, et cetera, beautiful homes torn down because they were not protected and creating such a disaster that the homeowners could no longer stand to live there in some of these neighborhoods. And again, the third district is the economic engine of Fayette County. And so for that reason, and actually I came here undecided, and the attorney for the opposition gave me more impetus to pass this, because he was talking about, it was a little confusing, but he talked about being more interested in rising property values than the future of the children and the future of Lexington. And I think it's just the other way around. It is about protecting what is so special about Lexington and this community that makes people want to come here. And I agree with you very much about the contemporary architecture, and I think you'll see that many contemporary, there are a lot of contemporary architectural types that are approved in some of these overlays, And, in fact, they discourage replication. So, you know, but this is, it's like the bunker, you know. You lose it block, block, block at a time. So the fact that the neighborhoods, the area between the boundary and Ashland Estates not being included, really isn't at issue. Because, like I say, the Ellsford Neighborhood Association is huge. And I, like Mr. Pohl, was in the late 80s, didn't know anything about historic overlays per se, and the agency I worked for bought some property, and I didn't know. Anyway, so I've moved. I've always been for preservation of what is special, but this is a special area, and losing this and cutting out that gateway to the neighborhood is very problematic for me. So for that reason, I'll be supporting it. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Clark. Thank you, Vice Mayor. First, I'd like to say that it would be kind of nice to see this whole area of the Henry Clay Farm included. I think that would be good. Unfortunately, I think that's immaterial at this point. We're not asked to do that. We're not asked to consider that. We're asked to consider this particular idea. And I think this issue is probably important as the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association brings it to us. But it's also more important than just that. I've spent some time thinking about this issue and have looked through a lot of the H-1 designations in Lexington. And you can do that not just driving through the neighborhood, but you can do that online. You can see some of these neighborhoods. You can see what effect this overlay has had. And so I think it's more than just the issue here. I think it's about historic preservation. It's about what Lexington is all about. It's about architectural integrity. It's about the historical value of our city. and I think the H1 overlay creates a value for Lexington as a whole. And I think this particular area is as close to the perfect example of what historical preservation is all about as we can just about have in Lexington, maybe out of the Grants Park area. So I appreciate the Neighborhood Association applying for this designation, and I will support this proposal. Thank you. Council Member Ford. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm referencing the designation report that the Division of Historic Preservation provided. but it's been mentioned before that there are criteria that we should judge in determining an area's eligibility, regardless of where those boundaries are. I know that is at play tonight. But Article 13, as I'm referencing this of the zoning ordinance, lays out those nine criteria. And in order to qualify or be eligible for such an overlay, I think the ordinance says you just must meet at least one of those nine criteria. The most profound evidence that's been presented tonight, in my opinion, is that this proposal goes well beyond that. It goes beyond just one of the nine criteria. It goes to five of the nine criteria. To me, that adds great credence to the petitioners, to the Neighborhood Association. Just talking about from a historic preservation perspective, the merits of this application. I think that ought to be one, and at a time, here very soon, I think that at least should be part of our findings of facts. It makes a very strong argument for the support of this application. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Council Member Myers. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I do think that when you look at the boundary that's been presented, it is if you want to look at NH1 overlay, an excellent example of what NH1 overlay should include. I think this is much different than some of the examples that I've been on the council to look at before. What I'd like to say is that I hope that there's a time that we can look at our process And the last time we had one of these, there was a lot of discussion about the process. And I think that to make things fair and to make things work for everybody, we ought to be able to look at whether or not a specific property within that area meets the criteria and therefore should be involved in the vote. But when you take the tower out, the vote's still there to do this. And clearly, in my opinion, when you look at the properties involved, they warrant this overlay. And so I'm going to support this, but I'm also going to ask that the vice mayor look at putting, and I don't want to put the whole process into committee and study this thing for a year and a half, but maybe if we could sit down and anybody who's interested look at some tweaks that we might make to the process and then bring those forward into some kind of recommendation that everybody could look at and see if that would work. So those are my comments. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Are there other Councilmember comments, opinions? Councilmember Scutchfield? Thank you, Vice Mayor. One of the things that I wanted to say, I don't doubt that this is a historic property or a historic area. I mean, it's been put on historic preservation, and it is a beautiful area. I think because we are acting as kind of the judge here, I have questionable belief in some of the evidence that has been put forth. I also have a hard time when we have people that own property telling them what they can do with it. So I'm not going to vote in favor, even though I do see the importance of the area. But as a judge, I don't feel like we've gotten true evidence from everyone. Thank you. Council Member Beard. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm very torn, in my opinion. I think H1 is a very good tool to protect not only these two streets, but to protect more than that. And I think that's the thing that bothers me somewhat, is that it's not more than that. It doesn't extend beyond Deshaies. I'm not anti H1 in any way, shape, or form. I very much like it. There's some things about this, though, that bother me. It slightly smacks of elitist. And the situation about the handover towers looks like let's look around and find some place that's got a whole bunch of folks in it that we can use as insurance that we're going to get the H-1 approved, and that bothers me somewhat. I don't know whether that's true, but it's out there, and you get that feeling back of your neck that something like that may have been created just for that purpose. It doesn't look like it belongs at all with all the rest of the beautiful homes on both Deshaies and Hanover. So I haven't made my mind yet, Vice Mayor. I'll have to weigh those and then see exactly where I come out, but those are my feelings at this point. Thank you. We're going to wait until the end of the game to hear your vote. Which game? Any other council members want to speak? if I might just before Council Member Kay speaks twice just to be sure I'm on safe ground I want to turn the gavel over to Council Member Ellinger before I express my opinions and I'll recognize Vice Mayor thank you well I think it's the first thing is I think it's an extraordinary process that we have here that we have a situation where we have an open system where a neighborhood can come and request such a thing as an H-1 overlay. Many cities don't even have this. And when people come in from out of town, I've heard it over and over and over from other cities and other states, They are astounded at how Lexington has taken action to preserve its historic homes and neighborhoods. I am going to support this. I think that the fact that not just one of the criteria was met, but several were met, is a very strong case. and I think that the corner property that was referred to, the towers, it's absolutely appropriate to have in there. The historic preservation report listed it, I think, as an international style. It doesn't look like the 100-year-old homes. No, it doesn't. However, of its time, it is a representative of that style. And I also agree with Councilmember Lawless who said once you start cutting at the edges, it can endanger the continuity of the area. This neighborhood, a majority of the people have come to us asking for this. It's been through the Board of Architectural Review. It's been through the planning staff, the historic preservation staff. It's been through the planning commission. I don't know where else it could have been. It's got a very strong recommendation. I understand the folks who do not support it. I understand your feelings about being able to do whatever you want with your property. But the reality of our community is no neighborhood allows you to do whatever you want with your property. You have to get permission. And that is what Lexington and its leaders for many, many years have decided, is that is how we want to be as a city and a community. So I am going to support it. Thank you. Thank you. Now I will give the gavel back to the Vice Mayor. Thank you very much, Council Member Ellinger. All right. We have Council Member Kay. Council Member Akers has not spoken yet. Yes, let's have the first timers. Council Member Akers. I just want to second what the Vice Mayor said in that this is a very strong application in that five of the nine criteria were met, and the issues of encroachment by the university and by just development in the surrounding areas, the diversity of the architecture. And for all of these reasons, I also will vote or will support this application tonight. And I want to make a point to the attorney for the opposition in saying, when you mentioned that for us to vote in support of this would be a vote against the confidence of the owners of the properties and just some sort of negative feelings of what we are here doing. And so I just want to, I guess, speak back to that and say that actually we do have confidence in the homeowners, and that's why it has been preserved, I think, for as long as it has been. But that's not to say that that can't change tomorrow and next week or next month. And so I'm actually glad to support it, and that's all. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You're welcome. Is there any council member who has not spoken once who wants to speak? I am. Council Member Massadi. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I do have some concerns about this. One of the concerns I do have is notification, making sure that someone coming into the neighborhood would be well aware that this does have a historic overlay. In my position, I am a realtor, and I will tell you that a lot of times people come from out of town or are unaware of this or they're with someone that's not aware of this as well, and this could be an issue. So I would hope that our planning staff would communicate that this is an H-1 overlay and this designation is in place because it does make a huge difference on someone deciding whether to move into a neighborhood or not because there are certain obligations, design obligations, and with that comes cost. I do think that we do, as Mr. Meyer said, have to look at some of this process. We've heard a lot of conflicting stories about how the boats were taken and the process was done, but I believe it was a well-deserved effort, and you did as best as you can considering there's a lot of people aren't home at times, meetings are difficult to attend, and so forth. It would be nice to have a more streamlined process in the future. And also we need to take a look at, I think, maybe some of the provisions considered in these H1 overlays. It's expensive to replace windows. It's expensive to replace doors. They've got products now that you can put in a fiberglass door that looks like a mahogany door, and it insulates as well. So sometimes that may, as Mr. Beard has said, give that elitist type, I guess, attitude. But for a neighborhood to come forth and go this long and to be this diligent and meet this kind of criteria, I applaud you. And I hope that in the future that other neighborhoods will look towards different ways to be able to preserve the integrity of their neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other council members who haven't spoken who want to speak? Okay. Council Member Kay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I want to make one more comment, and then I'm going to make a motion. And that's not meant to cut off debate, but just to put a motion on the floor. and the comment is that if people feel that the existing zoning ordinance which permits H1 and the existing language within which H1 operates is too restrictive, then the appropriate route is to propose changes in the zoning ordinance. What is not appropriate is to try and change the zoning ordinance on an ad hoc basis, given that it is a right that exists within our zoning ordinances now. So the question before us is not, is the present zoning ordinance regarding H-1-2 restrictive? The question is, given the existing ordinance, has a case been made that this application meets the criteria? And as a number of people have said, I think that, and I agree, that case has been made. Having said that, I move to adopt the findings of fact approved by the Planning Commission. Okay, we have a motion by Councilmember Kay and a second by Councilmember Akers to adopt the findings of fact from the Planning Commission. Is there any discussion? Councilmember Clark, did you want to discuss this motion? No. No? Okay. All those in favor? Is this a voice vote? Okay. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay. One no vote. This is not the end. I misstated that. It was supposed to be a roll call. I apologize. Okay. So we need to go back and take a roll call on that. Sorry about that. All right. Very good. the motion on the floor is to adopt findings of fact from the Planning Commission. And then the next vote will be on the ordinance itself. Mr. Clark? Aye. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Mr. Ford? Yes. Ms. Gorton? Aye. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. Kay? Yes. Ms. Lawless? Yes. Ms. Mazzotti? Yes. Mr. Myers? Yes. Mrs. Scutchfield? I apologize. I say it every time. Can you log in, please? I'm not in your vote. Mrs. Scutchfield? Okay. Ms. Akers? Yes. And Mr. Beard? Aye. Thank you. That motion passes 11 to 1. Now, Council Member Kay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I now move to approve the ordinance for second reading. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay. Council Member Kay moved to approve the ordinance, and Council Member Ford seconded. Will you, is there any further discussion, will you call the roll? Mr. Clark? Yes. Mr. Ellinger? Yes. Mr. Ford? Yes. Ms. Gorton? Aye. Ms. Henson? Yes. Mr. Kay? Yes. Ms. Lawless? Yes. Ms. Mazzotti? Yes. Mr. Myers? Yes. Ms. Scutchfield? Thank you. That motion passes. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Yes. And Mr. Beard. It's okay. I'm so sorry. They logged in before they did voice, so it was already a done deal. The vote was 11 to 1 to pass, so that motion is passed and the H-1 overlay is adopted. Do I hear motion to adjourn? I move. All right. All those in favor of adjourning, say aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? We are adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.