# Board of Adjustment Meeting - September 26, 2014 > Auto-transcribed civic record · September 26, 2014 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/3468 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/3468?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2014-09-26 - **Last revised**: July 15, 2026 - **Length**: 7,486 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 Board of Adjustment met on September 26, 2014, at 1:30 p.m. at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Chairman Barry Stumbo presiding. The board considered five agenda items during the meeting, taking seven votes and hearing eight public comments. The board approved three conditional use permits—for Davorka Klaric's home occupation clothing alteration business, Providence Community Church's establishment in a B-3 zone, and Jeannie O'Daniel's tent structure over an outdoor patio. The board denied a revocation hearing request from Sims Entertainment Group, LLC regarding their conditional use permit. Additionally, the Keeneland Association withdrew its appeal of a conditional use permit decision. ## Attendance **Present:** Barry Stumbo, Thomas Glover, Kathryn Moore, James Griggs, Larry Forester, Casey Kaucher, Chuck Saylor, Jim Marx, Tracy Jones, Bill Sallee, Jimmy Emmons, and Tammye McMullen. **Absent:** Janice Meyer and Joan Whitman. **Late:** None reported. ## Votes and Decisions **Approval of Minutes from June 27, 2014** [timestamp: 00:05:16] Motion by James Griggs, seconded by Larry Forester. Passed unanimously 5-0. All members voted in favor: Barry Stumbo, Thomas Glover, Kathryn Moore, James Griggs, and Larry Forester. **Approval of Minutes from July 25, 2014** [timestamp: 00:05:47] Motion by James Griggs, seconded by Larry Forester. Passed unanimously 5-0. All members voted in favor: Barry Stumbo, Thomas Glover, Kathryn Moore, James Griggs, and Larry Forester. **Denial of Postponement Request for C-2012-70: Sims Entertainment Group, LLC** [timestamp: 00:04:13] Motion by James Griggs, seconded by Thomas Glover. Passed unanimously 5-0. All members voted in favor: Barry Stumbo, Thomas Glover, Kathryn Moore, James Griggs, and Larry Forester. **C-2014-64: Conditional Use Permit for Providence Community Church, LLC** [timestamp: 00:08:12] Motion by Kathryn Moore, seconded by Thomas Glover. Approved unanimously 5-0 to establish a church in a Highway Service Business (B-3) zone at 2628 Wilhite Court. All members voted in favor. Conditions include: establishment in accordance with submitted application and site plan; obtaining all necessary permits including Zoning Compliance Permit and Certificate of Occupancy prior to commencement; and Board of Adjustment approval required for any future expansion. **C-2014-65: Conditional Use Permit for Jeannie O'Daniel** [timestamp: 00:09:17] Motion by Thomas Glover, seconded by Larry Forester. Approved unanimously 5-0 to erect a tent over an outdoor patio as part of a winery in the Agricultural Rural (A-R) zone at 6825 Old Richmond Road. All members voted in favor. Condition: temporary structure to be installed over patio according to submitted application and site plan for a maximum of 180 days in any calendar year. **C-2014-63: Conditional Use Permit for Davorka Klaric** [timestamp: 00:16:57] Motion by Kathryn Moore, seconded by Larry Forester. Approved unanimously 5-0 for a home occupation (clothing alteration) in a Single Family Residential (R-1D) zone at 833 Laurel Hill Road. All members voted in favor. Conditions include: operation in accordance with submitted application and site plan; obtaining necessary permits prior to continuation; compliance with Article 1-11 of the Zoning Ordinance; and permit becomes null and void if appellant no longer resides at location. **C-2012-70: Revocation of Conditional Use Permit for Sims Entertainment Group, LLC** [timestamp: 00:51:15] Motion by James Griggs, seconded by Thomas Glover. Passed unanimously 5-0 to revoke the conditional use permit to operate a bar/nightclub with live entertainment and dancing in a Neighborhood Business (B-1) zone at 815 Euclid Avenue. All members voted in favor: Barry Stumbo, Thomas Glover, Kathryn Moore, James Griggs, and Larry Forester. ## Public Comment The meeting included public comment on two primary matters: a home occupation permit and the conditional use permit for Sims Entertainment. **Home Occupation Permit** Jeff Brown spoke in opposition to a home occupation permit for Davorka Klaric [timestamp: 00:12:02]. Mr. Brown stated that Ms. Klaric had targeted him and called city officials to harass him. He accused her of bigotry and claimed she wanted him to move out. **Sims Entertainment Conditional Use Permit** Multiple speakers addressed the conditional use permit for Sims Entertainment, located at 815 Euclid Avenue, with the majority supporting revocation. David Jaquith, representing the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association, stated that residents have experienced ongoing disruptions due to the bar's violations of its conditional use permit and strongly supported revocation [timestamp: 00:34:02]. Councilman Bill Farmer supported revoking the permit, urging the Board to wipe the slate clean and allow a new, more compatible business to take over the property [timestamp: 00:35:18]. Sally Warfield emphasized that Sims Entertainment has a long history of violations, including repeated late hours and disorderly conduct, and argued the business is incompatible with the neighborhood [timestamp: 00:37:02]. Patty Abell, representing the Louisiana Neighborhood Association, stated the bar has been a persistent nuisance and that its late hours are deliberate, not accidental [timestamp: 00:39:14]. Sergeant Jason Parks reported 12 documented instances of the bar remaining open past 1:00 a.m. since the July 25 hearing, with five related arrests and two ABC administrative charges for selling alcohol to minors [timestamp: 00:40:16]. Peter Ecabert, president of the Chevy Chase Plaza Condo Association, argued the nightclub is incompatible with the neighborhood and that the owners could shut it down by revoking the liquor license [timestamp: 00:44:10]. Janie Fergus, a long-time resident, stated she had previously spoken with the owner about issues, which were never resolved, and reiterated her support for revocation [timestamp: 00:46:52]. ## Contested Items **Personal Conflict in C-2014-63 Appeal** A neighbor opposed a home occupation permit, basing the objection on a personal dispute that included racial allegations and harassment claims. The Board determined that these personal matters fell outside its jurisdiction and were not relevant to the permit decision. **Revocation of Sims Entertainment's Conditional Use Permit** The revocation of Sims Entertainment's conditional use permit generated significant community opposition. Multiple residents and officials testified during the hearing regarding ongoing violations and adverse impacts associated with the business operation. The Board voted unanimously to revoke the permit. ## Keeneland Association - Withdrawal of conditional use permit appeal **Item:** C-2014-35 Keeneland Association withdrew its application for a conditional use permit to expand operations at 3801-4081 Versailles Road. [timestamp: 00:02:26] Jimmy Emmons addressed the Board regarding the withdrawal. The Board acknowledged the applicant's withdrawal of the conditional use permit appeal without taking further action on the matter. **Outcome:** The application was withdrawn. ## Sims Entertainment Group, LLC - Revocation hearing of conditional use permit [timestamp: 00:17:59] The Board held a revocation hearing for Sims Entertainment Group, LLC's conditional use permit for a nightclub. The hearing reviewed evidence of repeated violations of the permit's operating conditions. **Key Participants** The hearing included testimony and presentations from Jimmy Emmons, Krista Hollingsworth, David Jaquith, Bill Farmer, Sally Warfield, Patty Abell, Sergeant Jason Parks, and Peter Ecabert. **Violations Reviewed** The Board examined evidence of noncompliance with multiple conditions of the conditional use permit, specifically: - Condition 2 - Condition 3 - Condition 10 The violations centered on repeated breaches of operating hours and noise restrictions established as requirements for the nightclub's operation. **Outcome** The Board revoked the conditional use permit for Sims Entertainment Group, LLC due to the documented noncompliance with the specified conditions. The permit denial was based on the establishment's failure to comply with the operating restrictions imposed as conditions of the permit. ## Davorka Klaric - Conditional use permit for home occupation (clothing alteration) [timestamp: 00:10:25] The Board considered a conditional use permit application from Davorka Klaric for a home occupation involving clothing alteration in a residential zone. **Key Speakers** The discussion involved Jimmy Emmons, Davorka Klaric, and Jeff Brown. **Application and Discussion** Davorka Klaric requested approval to operate a clothing alteration business from her residence. The application required a conditional use permit to allow this commercial activity within a residential zoning district. **Concerns Raised** A neighbor opposed the permit application and raised personal grievances during the hearing. However, the Board determined that these personal disputes fell outside its jurisdiction and were not relevant to the conditional use permit decision. **Outcome** The Board approved the conditional use permit for Davorka Klaric's home occupation clothing alteration business. The approval proceeded despite the neighbor's opposition, as the Board's focus remained on whether the proposed use met the applicable zoning and conditional use permit criteria rather than on personal conflicts between neighbors. ## Providence Community Church, LLC - Conditional use permit for church in B-3 zone **Case Number:** C-2014-64 **Overview** The Board considered a conditional use permit application for Providence Community Church, LLC to operate a church in a B-3 commercial zone. [timestamp: 00:07:33] **Key Speakers** - Gary Thompson - Paul Valentine **Discussion and Outcome** The Board approved the conditional use permit for the church property located in the commercial zone. The approval included conditions requiring the applicant to comply with approved site plans and to meet specific requirements related to any future expansion of the facility. The conditional use permit allows the church to operate in the B-3 zone, which is designated for commercial use, through the conditional use process that permits certain uses not otherwise allowed in that zoning classification. ## Jeannie O'Daniel - Conditional use permit to erect a tent over outdoor patio **Identifier:** C-2014-65 The Board considered a conditional use permit request from Jeannie O'Daniel to erect a tent structure over an outdoor patio at a winery. [timestamp: 00:08:43] **Key Speakers:** - Preston Worley - Jeannie O'Daniel **Discussion and Outcome:** The Board approved the temporary tent structure based on staff recommendations. The approval included a condition limiting the tent's use to 180 days per calendar year. No opposition to the request was raised during the meeting. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (5-0): Approval of minutes from June 27, 2014 - **Motion** — passed (5-0): Approval of minutes from July 25, 2014 - **Motion** — passed (5-0): Denial of postponement request for C-2012-70: Sims Entertainment Group, LLC - **C-2014-64** — passed (5-0): Approval of conditional use permit for Providence Community Church, LLC to establish a church in a Highway Service Business (B-3) zone at 2628 Wilhite Court - **C-2014-65** — passed (5-0): Approval of conditional use permit for Jeannie O’Daniel to erect a tent over an outdoor patio as part of the winery in the Agricultural Rural (A-R) zone at 6825 Old Richmond Road - **C-2014-63** — passed (5-0): Approval of conditional use permit for Davorka Klaric for a home occupation (clothing alteration) in a Single Family Residential (R-1D) zone at 833 Laurel Hill Road - **C-2012-70** — passed (5-0): Revocation of conditional use permit for Sims Entertainment Group, LLC to operate a bar/nightclub with live entertainment and dancing in a Neighborhood Business (B-1) zone at 815 Euclid Avenue --- ## Full transcript And everything that's better, the world is ours whenever we're two There ain't a place I like to be in, yeah Ooh, yeah, down a crowded avenue Ooh, yeah, anything we like to do There's always lots of things that we can see We can't be anyone we'd like to All those happy people we could meet Just do that On a Sunday afternoon We're here Couldn't get away too soon No, no, no, no Ah, ah, ah Thank you. You can be seated. Before I read the agenda, Mr. Emmons or Mr. Salee, do we have any withdrawals or postponements? Mr. Chairman, the staff would like to point out that the Keeneland application, which was for an entertainment complex, was originally postponed and scheduled to be on today's hearing. That has been withdrawn by the applicant, so that application is over and done with. So there's no action that needs to be taken by us? There is no action just recognizing that it was withdrawn by the applicant and not on today's agenda. Mr. Chairman, we've also received one written request for postponement. It is from Stephen Whitey's for Mr. Gerald Mack and the art bar. It involves the application on the bottom of your first page of your agenda, C-2012-70. Mr. Mack, or pardon me, Mr. Whitey's is not able to be here today. I'm Andrew Stevens. I'm Mr. Whitey's his law partner. I'm ill-equipped to argue it. All I know is Mr. Whitey's was not given notice until very late. He has two conflicts in other courts. He's asked for a postponement of, I believe it's matter, C-212-70. It's up to the board to decide whether we're going to postpone this. I beg your pardon. We have a decision whether or not, the board has a decision whether or not to vote to continue this case or not. And at this time, I will ask the board what is their pleasure. I think there's been two months that they've known this was coming up. Well, the license holder apparently is, on the docket at least, is Sims Entertainment Group, LLC. Mr. Whitey's client is the lessee, Gerald Mack. I don't know that he got actual notice of it, and I can tell you my limited knowledge is Mr. Whitey's didn't have notice of it until yesterday. So he is unable to be here. He's unable to represent the interest of the lessee, and it's his request that you all postpone. this room is packed with people that have modified their day to be here. And it seems that Mr. Mack could have made arrangements to be represented if he wanted to. So, Mr. Chair, I'd like to move that we deny this request for postponement. Thank you, Mr. Griggs. Is there a second? So second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? We're going to continue the hearing. All right, sir. Thank you. Anything else, Mr. Emmons or Mr. Salee? I'd like to go ahead and read the agenda, and I'm going to ask if the applicant is present, and if there's no opposition, we'll hear those cases first. If there is opposition, we ask that you all step in the hall and try to resolve those cases, that the staff has recommended disapproval, or if you disagree with the applicant. Before we begin, we have actually two sets of minutes. We have the minutes of June 27, 2014. I'd like to ask if I think we've all had an opportunity to take a look at that. Is there a motion to accept the June 27 meeting? Mr. Chair, I move that we accept those minutes. Thank you, Mr. Griggs. Is there a second? I second that motion. Thank you, Mr. Forster. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? We also have the July 25th 2014 minutes that have been sent to you, and I would ask if there are any additions or corrections to those. And if not, I would ask a motion to approve. Move to approve. Thank you, Mr. Griggs. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Mr. Forrester. All of those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you very much. I'm going to go ahead and sound the agenda. I'd like to first of all ask if Sims Entertainment Group, if they are present. Thank you. Is there any opposition to Sims Entertainment? Just a question that must be asked. Thank you. I'd like to ask if Dvorak Cleric is here. Is there any opposition to this? Providence Community Church, are they represented here today? Thank you. Is there any opposition to Providence Community Church? Any opposition? I believe the last one is Jeannie O'Daniel. Is the applicant present? Yes, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Is there any opposition to Jeannie O'Daniel? No opposition. Thank you all very much. We are going to hear Providence Community Church. Would the applicant please step forward and state their name for the record? Gary Thompson, attorney on behalf of Providence Community Church. With the applicant. Paul Ballantyne, pastor of Providence Community Church. Thank you very much, gentlemen. The staff has recommended approval subject to three conditions. Do you agree to abide by those conditions? We do. Does the staff have any questions for the applicant? If not, any member of the board? If not, we'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that C-2014-64 Providence Community Church LLC's appeal for a conditional use permit to establish a church and highway service business B-3 zone at 2628 Wheel Height Court Suites 1115-215 Council District 4 be approved for the reasons recommended by the staff and subject to the three conditions recommended by the staff. Thank you, Ms. Moore. Is there a second? I'm second. Mr. Glover, second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Good luck, gentlemen. Thank you. Thank you. Jeannie O'Daniel, would the applicant please come forward, state your name for the record. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Preston Worley, McBerry Law Firm, on behalf of the applicant. And this is Ms. Jeannie O'Daniel, who is the applicant. Thank you, Mr. Worley. The staff has recommended approval subject to one condition. Do you agree to abide by that condition? Yes, Mr. Chairman. Does any members of the board have a question for the applicant or for Mr. Worley? If not, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move we approve the appeal of C2014 Day 65, Jenny O'Daniel, for a conditional use permit to erect a tent over an outdoor patio as part of the winery in the agricultural rural zone at 6825 Old Richmond Road for the reasons recommended by staff and subject to the one condition listed. Thank you, Mr. Glover. Is there a second? A second. Mr. Forrester, seconds. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Very good. Good luck. Thank you. I'm going to go back to Ms. Cleric. Would the applicant please come forward? Mr. Chairman, as the applicant is coming forward, the staff has received one letter of opposition and two letters of support. I will pass those out at the beginning. Ms. Cleric, if you'll give us just a second, we're going to pass these out and take a look at them. Thank you. Thank you. take a look at these. Ms. Cleric, your appeals for a conditional use permit for a home occupation or clothing alteration, actually the staff has recommended approval subject to four conditions. Do you agree to abide by those conditions? Yes, sir. Very good. I know that there is opposition and we're going to let the opposition speak, but I'd like to ask if anybody on the board would like to question, have any questions for Ms. Cleric? Ms. Cleric, you can have a seat. Thank you. We'll be back to you. Sir, I believe that you had raised your hand. Would you please come up to the podium and state your name for the record? Gladly. My name is Jeff Brown. I live directly across the street from Dvorakha on a rental property directly beside Dvorakha. I basically oppose this because of her and two or three of her neighbors that have basically ganged up on me. And I will explain. Two years ago, I rented my rental property directly beside Dvorak to a young, quiet couple. They're not married. They have two children. None of that matters. two or three weeks later his best friend starts coming over his best friend is a very articulate african-american gentleman he's in his third year law school not long after moving in devorka meets me in the street looks at me and says i hate you and i said why do you hate me I haven't done anything to you. Her words. Mr. Brown, I want to stop you right there. This sounds like this is a personal issue. No. I want you to be very careful in your comments. I'm being very careful. And if you're opposed to this because it violates planning and zoning, it's one thing. I will get there. But I want you to be very careful here. And this is not a – we don't sit here to listen to personal issues. This is not – Get to the point. I will get to the point. Her statement was, I hate you because you brought that N-word over here. This is rental property. This is a violation of my rights. I cannot discriminate because of people of color. Ever since that day, she has been a thorn in my flesh, calling city, calling zoning, doing everything she and her friends can do to aggravate me. I'm sure her goal is to get me to move. Sorry, I don't back down. But this spring, she ratcheted up a little bit, and she called zoning. Mr. Marks is here, aren't you? Mr. Marks came out and visited my house. He said, I want to investigate a complaint about you running a daycare. You've got lots of toys in your yard. Complaint says lots of toys, and you have several children of a different race coming in and out of your house. Let me introduce you to the children coming in and around my house. I have Emma, Ken, from China. I have Riley, the six from the state. Sir, we need you on the microphone. Sir, just a moment. I have Cassie, five and a half from China. They all have friends. Some of them are Hispanic. Some of them are African American. Didn't know it was against the law to have children of another race at my house. This lady's a bigot. I'm sorry. I do not support this application because of her views. And no, there is not a way to change this. There is one way that she will change. And the only thing that can change her is God. So I do not support rewarding bad behavior. I move that this application is not accepted. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Does anybody have any questions for Mr. Brown? Mr. Marks, did you have anything to add? You made a site visit? Not really. We do have an open enforcement case with regard to Mr. Brown's property, not the daycare, but a landscaping business, and I really can't discuss much about that right now. Thank you, Mr. Marks. Ms. Cleric, you can come back up, if you would, please. Ms. Clark, we're not going to get into these kind of issues. That's not what this board's purpose is. You have, sounds like there's some relations that need to be improved with the neighbors, but that is not our jurisdiction here today. We have received a staff recommendation for approval subject to the four conditions, which you had agreed to abide by. I'd like to once again ask the board if they've got any questions for for Mrs. cleric if we have no questions for miss cleric the chair will entertain a motion Mr. Chair I move that C 2014-63 to for clerics appeal for conditional use permit for home occupation clothing alteration in a single family residential r1d zone at 833 laurel hill road council district 11 be approved for the reasons recommended by the staff and subject to the four conditions recommended by the staff thank you is there a second i second that motion mr forrester seconds all in favor signify by saying aye any opposed your conditional permit has been has been approved and i hope that we can find some peace in the neighborhood but because it sounds like you all have some issues. I was going to say, if you can try to work that out. I hope so. I'm not there. None of us are there, so we really can't go by. I'm going to tell you this. I love his children. They play with me all these years. Before, a couple years ago, what he started telling you about two years, if you don't mind me to tell you about it. No, it's okay. I'm just meaning that. It's not the time, but if you can, just try to do the best you can. It's not the time, so I just wish this goes away. Well, good luck to you, and I hope you guys will work out. And I thank you for approval. Thank you. All right, we've got Sims Entertainment Group. This is, I want to remind everyone that this is a revocation hearing and for the conditional use permit. And folks, I'll tell you, we're going to set some parameters here today. The July minutes are part of the historical record. And so I would ask that the, I would ask that the opposition have a spokesperson that is going to represent them. One of the things that we are very concerned about, we've heard extensively from Mr. Mack and from the opposition in July. We've also, many folks have voiced their concerns. And today, I've asked Mr. Emmons, he's got a staff report first, and I'm going to put a 15-minute time limit on him, and I'm going to put a 15-minute time limit on the applicant and a 15-minute time limit collectively on the opposition as well. This case has been, we've heard both sides very extensively, and I don't think that you all or certainly the board does not want to hear repetition of what has happened in the past. So with that, and I will hold you to it, and if I see you getting off the, whether it's the opposition or whether it's the applicant or Mr. Emmons, if it's the staff, We will make sure that we abide by our limits. And then, of course, there will be, you'll have an opportunity to, the board will have an opportunity to ask questions that you all will be able to respond. But initially, I'd like for you to hold your remarks to 15 minutes. Mr. Emmons? Mr. Chair, it appears that Mr. Mack and his attorney are not in the room. so we may want to see if they're in the hall before we get started. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Salee. Mr. Chairman, I did not see them outside of the room or on the first floor, but I did see them outside of the building. The attorney that was here earlier was not present, but I informed them that the board had called this case and asked them whether or not they would be participating in the meeting. I believe it was Mr. Mack indicated to me that they did not plan to attend your meeting this afternoon. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Saleh. Mr. Emmons, would you like to come back? Thank you, Mr. Jim. Mr. Emmons, before you begin, I'd like to ask legal counsel, So, Ms. Jones, does it matter that the applicant is not here or not? We can proceed as? Yeah, you can proceed. I mean, he's made a decision not to be here. So I think, though, earlier, did you say there was someone here from Sims? Yes. So we can proceed, and that's his choice. Very good. I thought so. Go ahead, Mr. Emmons, please. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Today, to first start off, I handed out just prior to this the written communications that we have received for this. The majority of them are letters of opposition. On the top is a petition that was handed to the staff right before today's hearing. So that's what the packet with the red paperclip on it is. You also have before you, we have passed out prior to the hearing aid packet that has information that has a clip on it so that you can unclip it. And I will go through that information fairly quickly for you. So at the start of the packet, and you can see for the record, there are notice letters that were sent to Mr. Gerald Mack and Albert Grash for the attorney for Sims Entertainment. You can also see that they're copied the neighborhood associations that were originally notified with the conditional use applications. all of those letters are notifying the applicant of today's revocation hearing. The next page, the next two pages, you might want to go ahead and pull them out and take them off to the side. In the blue is an updated version of the timeline that the staff has gone over with you before. For this one, it has an abbreviated history of the Board of Adjustment actions on this property since its inception. The staff would point out that really, and part of the reason why I said put this off to the side, is that should the board choose to revoke this conditional use application, there are essentially two case numbers. The original case was C91-96, JDs of Lexington, and that case number was later modified with C2012-70, Sims Entertainment Group. This blue sheet has all of the dates of the board's actions, including it has been updated at the bottom for the July 25th hearing and the actions that you took at that, which leads you up to the BOA revocation hearing which was scheduled for today. The next is a green sheet which has the current certificate of land use restriction. This is a summary of the 13 conditions that the board has placed on this use. This is another one of those pages that you would probably want to set to the side as we will come back to that. This has the listed conditions. Right behind that is the previous certificate of land use restriction on a white piece of paper that has the 13 conditions that were prior to the July 25th hearing. and then we begin the portion where we've got information regarding the specific conditions of this particular case. The staff would like to point out on the green sheet items number two and three, conditions number two and three were changed at your July 25th hearing to 1 a.m., the hours of operation. Both conditions 2 and 3 have the hours of operation from 8.30 p.m. until 1 a.m. Wednesday through Saturday, and that any private parties to be held from 8.30 to 1.8. Did I say 1 p.m.? I need to make sure I get that correct. Condition number 2 has a closing time of 1 a.m., and condition number 3 has a closing time of 1 a.m. for that. Since that time, since your July 25th hearing and those that the bar has been open past 1 a.m., we have mailed out to you previously as a part of our staff report a listing of police reports that indicate every week that we have gotten a report from the police that the bar has been open past 1 a.m. since the board put the condition on it that it be 1 a.m. The only new information that I have that was not mailed to you and also mailed to the applicant is this week's report from the police department, which also states that the art bar was open until 2.30 a.m. The staff is also presenting a conditional use permit hours of operation memo that was written by the Division of Planning. After the first instance, after that the art bar was opened up, opened beyond the 1 a.m. after the board's action, we sent the Division of Planning a memo stating the board's action requires that the club cease their operations at 1 a.m. That was noted on August 7th, shortly after your July 25th hearing. All of these police reports help to indicate that this information is contradictory to the limitations that were put into Conditions 2 and 3. next in your in your major pack and i will not go over it once again you can see that the timeline is on top of all of the minutes the staff has assembled all of the minutes for this application from the original approval on october 25th 1991 to your july 25th 2014 hearing minutes which were just approved at today's hearing. So that is a complete listing of the minutes. I'm not going to reread those minutes to you, and the board is well aware during your previous hearings that there was much testimony that was given about the nuisances that this particular case was causing. And with that, on July 25th, The staff is resubmitting the petition that was given to you on July 25th requesting the revocation hearing. And the staff is resubmitting the pictures, which I apologize in your copy, I don't think that they came out very well, but these are just resubmitted pictures of the trash and other debris that the neighbors had submitted during your July 25th hearing. The staff does believe that the evidence with the testimony and other items that were submitted in the previous hearings, that that information also appears to contradict the limitations of condition number 10, which is saying that the use shall be soundproof to the maximum feasible and that noise and other emissions not creating a nuisance to the surrounding neighborhood. I believe that there is ample evidence in both the police reports and this to document that conditions 2, 3, and 10 are not being complied with. I believe that concludes all of the staff exhibits. Of course, we will be available throughout your hearing should you have any questions for us. or if there is other questions that come up during the hearing based off of the other evidence. In conclusion, just should you choose to disapprove it, remember to include both case numbers, the 91 case number and the 2014 number. And that concludes my remarks. If you have any questions. Thank you, Mr. Emmons. Does anybody on the board have any questions for Mr. Emmons? Very good. Thank you, sir. I'd like to ask the applicant if they would like to come up. Please state your name for the record. Krista Hollingsworth. I'm here for Al Grash on behalf of Sims Entertainment. As I think everyone here knows, we do own the property, but we have a lessee, Mr. Gerald Mack, who is in charge of all day-to-day operations, management, all of that. So as far as the goings-on there and things that have been happening, Unfortunately, my client is not in control of that, so I can't speak to that. However, in our own interest, in the interest of our lessee, we would just like to go on record and say that we oppose revoking this conditional use permit. Thank you very much, Ms. Hollingsworth. Does anybody have any questions? Okay. Anyone from the opposition would like to speak? And please step forward to the mic and state your name for the record. And again, we've got all these things that are part of the record that are in the record, so if you've got something new, please share it. But if you don't... I'll be brief. Okay. I'm David Jakewith, a resident of South Hanover Avenue and officer of the Ashland Park Neighborhood Association, a member of the Board of Directors, who I represent today. Our association geographically consists of South Ashland, South Hanover, Deshaies Road, and portions of Central Avenue and Fincastle Road, and contains approximately 330 households. Our neighborhood immediately abuts the Chevy Chase Business District and is therefore directly impacted by activities in that area. Many of our members have experienced detrimental effects and disruptions in their lives as a direct result of multiple and continuing violations of the conditional use permit for the property at 815 Euclid Avenue. We therefore strongly support the revocation of that permit. Also, with your permission, I would like to ask those who are opposed to stand up, if you would. Based on that, again, we strongly support the revocation of that permit. You often sit. We see you. Thank you. Mr. Chair, members of the board, I'm Bill Farmer. I want to thank you for your time and respect for your service. You had asked for a group of us to kind of, we are an organic group. So I have a few comments. I think it would be good for you all to hear from Jason Parks with the Alcoholic Beverage Control, Mr. Egbert in the back, Ms. Fergus up here. Mr. Farmer, as long as we can keep it at 15 minutes, I'll listen to him. Go quickly. I concur with what's been said. At the time these conditions were put in place, this was just a time spent between six neighborhood associations and the Merchants Association. And today in this room, you have neighbors, you have property owners, and you have business owners. And we need for you to wipe the slate clean and start again. The conditional uses do not fit the opportunity that Chevy Chase presents today. And the neighborhood's very interested in a different sort of outcome for that piece of property and its use. Your time in thinking about removing these conditional uses is very important because I think we're looking for a new use with different conditions at a different time to be set then. But for now, the best answer is to stop what conditions are there. We understand that the person who is there now has indicated they're going to move that business. So I think that it's important to set the stage for the next folks to come in there and be positive parts of the community and the neighborhood. Appreciate your action on this today in our favor. Thank you, Councilman. Thanks for being here. Hello, my name is Sally Warfield. I'm the legislative aide for Diane Lawless. She represents the 3rd District where our bar is located. We are here to support the constituency. Obviously, she sent me here to support the constituency. But we'd also like to note that what is not at issue here is a personality conflict. What is not at issue here is anything personal. What we would like to note is that this business, Sims Entertainment, has done business under a number of different headings. Art Bar is the latest one. They've also been New Moon. They've been Forte. And we've had these problems going back for several years now. I've read minutes as far back as 2012, and here we are in 2014. So these things are not going away. And having looked at the conditional use here, I mean, we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven different conditions put on this thing to begin with, plus two more that were just recently added. And if you require this many conditions to be able to function effectively in the area that you're in, perhaps this is not the best area for that business to be in. And as we've seen over and over, they aren't even able to function within the boundaries that are set out in the conditional use permit. They are constantly disregarding the 1 a.m. closing date. They are, according to ABC reports that we've seen, they are not keeping an orderly premises. There are constant emissions that you've heard lots of reports about, from noise to vomit to urine, which is also reflected in the police reports that you have in front of you. And so we would just like you to consider revoking this conditional use permit, not for any other reason other than this has been shown not to work. We're trying to put a square peg in a round hole, and it just doesn't fit. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Warfield. Hello, I'm Patty Abel, and I'm representing the Louisiana Avenue Neighborhood Association. and I just wanted to let you know that we've taken a formal vote to go on record to oppose that we would like to have the conditional permit use revoked. We are tired of this business being in our neighborhood. And finally, I would like to say that it's not happenstance that they are open to 2.30. Management is deliberately staying open until 2.30, as evidenced by their flyers that go out every week in social media. So this is not happenstance that they happen to be open. They're deliberately trying to be open until 2.30 and violating the directives of this board. We would like to have their use permit revoked. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Abel. I'm Jason Parks, Sergeant with the Lexington Police Department. I'm here primarily on behalf of Commander Melissa Selichek, who was here on July 25th. She apologizes for not being able to be here. She was called away at the last moment. Obviously, as a division of police, we can't oppose or approve of this kind of licenses or conditional uses. However, she thought it necessary to provide a little bit of detail as to what her patrol officers have documented and witnessed since the July 25th meeting. There have been a total of 12 times that they have documented that the property has remained open past the 1 o'clock a.m. time frame that you all have imposed upon them on the July 25th meeting. And of those 12 incidents, there have been five incidents when patrol officers have had to make arrests, cite additional people or cite people outside, and those five times were either directly or indirectly related to the activity at the club past the 1 o'clock time frame. And of those five times, my office, the ABC office, has filed two additional ABC administrative charges against Sims Entertainment, the ABC license holder there. And of those two cases, there's five total charges. So that's kind of what's going on just prior or just since July 25th. Can you share what those charges are? The charges, yes, I can. The charges are still pending. There was supposed to have been a hearing this past Wednesday to move to revoke the ABC license against Sims Entertainment. That has actually been postponed until October 8th. But, again, that is in relation to Sims Entertainment and their ABC license and not necessarily the property itself. But those incidents were as a result of August 3rd of 2014, an incident of disorderly premises, which basically is, as we've stated, either music or tumultuous behavior, loud music, fighting, that kind of thing is usually what that stems from. An additional charge for that date on August 3rd is violation of KRS 244080. They permitted or sold or gave away alcoholic beverages to a minor. and the third charge on the incident was they allowed a minor to enter or remain on the property in violation of statute. The second case that has been brought against them since July 25th was the incident on August 8th for another violation of 244.080, that's a state statute, selling alcohol to a minor and a violation of 244-085, again, allowing a minor under the age of 21 to enter or remain on the premises. Thank you, Sergeant. Does anyone have any questions? Mr. Glover? You mentioned that there were five arrests since our hearing. Sergeant, would you go back to the mic, please? You mentioned there were five arrests. Were they relevant to any issues that we're hearing about today? To clarify, and again, those are notes from Commander Sedlicek as far as those five incidents. Those are just incidents that her patrol officers, while they were there to document the fact or the possibility that they were staying open past 1 o'clock, they responded to calls for service in or around that club. I don't have the details as far as what those incidents were. We can certainly get that for you if you needed it. But there was just cases or incidents where the patrol officers had to do something in or around the club that they felt was related to the club itself. Thank you, sir. They felt it was related to the operation of the club after the 1 o'clock closing time? Or just prior to or after. The officers were there after 1 o'clock, yes, to document the fact they were there or remained open past 1 o'clock. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir. I'm going to give you the last word. Good afternoon, Chairman Stumbo. Thank you very much for this opportunity to speak to the board. I have some additional petitions that were signed by residents of the Chevy Chase area, another 38. I think you have, these are new ones. You have some from the last hearing and then other ones that were supplemented. Let me, these petitions support the revocation of the conditional use as a nightclub for this premises. We also would like to point out that the Sims Entertainment is the party with the conditional use. They're the party of record. They're the party, as of today, checking at the Secretary of State's office. The Sims Entertainment is a LLC, limited liability company, that is owned and managed by Lawrence Kopsik, who's a dentist here in town. The other member is Robert Thompson, who's a doctor in Louisville. Those two individuals, and obviously they're here represented by counsel. but it's their liquor license. If they wanted to shut this thing down, they could shell their liquor license, and this could go away quickly. But we asked you to take the action because, as has been testified earlier, this type of operation is not compatible with this neighborhood. There are a number of other things that can happen here that will be much more compatible with the neighborhood. This has been a nuisance from the get-go for the last couple of years. It's been particularly bad within the last few months since Mr. Mack has taken over the operation, as you know and as was explained to you during the last hearing on July the 25th. And additionally, I would point out that Ural's representative, Mr. King, sent a letter to Mr. Mack, hand-delivered a letter to Mr. Mack, stating that you're not to stay open past 1 o'clock unless a court of competent jurisdiction has an injunction stating that you can remain open until 2.30. That never was done. It was just totally ignored, as this police sergeant has testified. So we would ask that you take all that into account. You would ask that you take into account that this is a nuisance that is not compatible with the neighborhood, is not a good neighbor, and we'd ask that you revoke their conditional use. Thank you. Thank you very much. Does anyone have any questions, Mr. Eckebert? Thank you very much. Thank you. Sir, I'm sorry. Could we get your name for the record? Yes, Peter Eckebert. I'm the president of the Chevy Chase Plaza Condo Association. Thank you. Good afternoon. Kelly Mullins with Collar Properties Equity Management Group. We own several of the surrounding businesses. I wanted to correct something that was said earlier. The owner of this property is not Sims Entertainment Group. They own the liquor license or a previous tenant. The actual owner is John Cole. I spoke to his attorney yesterday, make sure they knew about this hearing, and they're not here. Thank you. Okay, thank you. My name's Janie Fergus, and I live in the 300 block of South Hanover Avenue. And I've lived there for 19 years and have witnessed several years of really significant problems to the point I talked to Dr. Kopsik and or his attorney several years ago, two years ago I believe it was, where he assured me that the issues would be addressed. Clearly they have not been. I wasn't clear as when Mr. Emmons was saying that what was in the packets. I had prepared a letter with attachments and I didn't hear that that was distributed. And if it wasn't, I'll go through my points if it was. I'll summarize real quickly. Ms. Fergus, I will want to say I see you've got those photos. Are those the photos that we saw previously in July? This is, yes. Again, as I've mentioned before, you know, we've got our parameters. We're going to stick to them, and I only want new information from you. If we've seen those photos, we don't need to see them again. Also, Ms. Fergus's letter and what is in the opposition letters with the red paper clip and what she's talking about was passed out. We do have your letter, Ms. Fergus. Okay, great. That's what I wanted to make sure. This was distributed. I have learned what fancy ladies mean. I did not touch on that in the Urban Dictionary. It is prostitutes. It was probably tongue-in-cheek, but I don't think that's fitting for our neighborhood association or our neighborhood to be having that kind of party in our neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Fergus. I'd like to ask counsel. We've heard testimony and obviously the applicant has left us. And I think that there's overwhelming evidence from the staff and certainly the opposition with Sims Entertainment and the bar itself. I'd like to ask Ms. Jones, if we wanted to make a motion to revoke this, what would be the best way in going about that? You'll need to make a motion with some findings and vote on it to revoke it. So we want to, I know the three conditions that staff had mentioned were item 2, 3, and 4. I'm sorry, 2, 3, and 10 were the three. Ms. Jones, as you get back to your seat, too, I wanted to ask this. If we vote to go ahead and revoke this permit, this is revoking the Sims Entertainment permit. It's not just the person that's leasing the property, Mr. Mack. Is that correct? It means there will be no conditional use permit on this property. So, therefore, they can't lease it to anyone to do things that are in that permit. Okay. I'd like to ask if any of the board, Mr. Forster, do you have a question? No, she answered it. The staff attorney answered my question. Does anybody have any questions for Ms. Jones or any of the staff? Ms. Jones, I do have a question. Are there any statutory or ordinance findings that are required for us? Are there any specific findings that are required by the ordinances in order for us to revoke a conditional use? You'd need to find there's noncompliance with the conditions. Okay. And that's the degree the ordinance addresses it. Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions? If there are not, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move for revocation of all conditional uses under cases C-2012-70 and the older case C-91-96, Sim Entertainment Group, LLC, in the neighborhood business zone at 815 Euclid Avenue, based on the following findings. The applicant is in direct violation of conditions 2 and 3 of the amended conditional use permit by remaining open beyond the hours set forth in the permit intentionally and as evidenced by police reports and direct observations. The applicant is in violation of the conditional use permit condition number 10 by allowing noise that creates a nuisance to the neighborhood causing an adverse impact on the neighborhood. Thank you, Mr. Griggs. We've got a motion to revoke the permit. Is there a second? I second. Mr. Glover seconds. All in favor signify with saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? the conditional use permit is revoked. Let me ask you this, Ms. Jones. The applicant, obviously our decisions are final, and the only recourse I think that the applicant would have would be to file a case in circuit court. Is that correct, within 30 days? Yes, within 30 days from the date of today. and, you know, your order is effective today. So, and let me ask you this, Ms. Jones, if they do not abide by our order today, do we seek an injunction then to remove them? That is certainly a possibility, yes. Well, ladies and gentlemen, this case is concluded and it is revoked. And thank you all very much for your time. I'd like to ask the staff if there's any other items. I believe we concluded our agenda. Mr. Chairman, there's nothing else on your agenda. We have emailed you about a unique training opportunity in a couple of weeks, and we appreciate the responses we've gotten back from you on that. Thank you. Yes, I appreciate that, Mr. Salee. And I do want to mention that Ms. McMullin gave us a written disclosure of conflict of interest. And something that we need to do, if we recuse ourselves from a case, we need to fill this out. I know on a rare occasion that does happen. So I just want to remind the Board of Adjustment, if you do recuse yourself, we need you to sign this document and get it to Tammy, if you would. Mr. Chair, I just want to point out to you, I put a memo at your places for me. It has some attachments to it. There are recent decisions in cases or filings that apply to Board of Adjustment cases. We are expecting this might take a little longer today. I'll be happy to answer any questions you have about that or if you want to we can discuss next month We they're pretty recent and we don't have a lot of further Development beyond what you have there, but we probably will at next month's meeting well If it's if it's up to the board if you're going to have some more information at the other Next month's meeting. I've seen no reason why we couldn't hear it then unless any of the other members Object? We'll go ahead. So will you be addressing the community end case with us? I haven't had a chance to look at this handout. I'm not sure what's in it. Yes, I'll be able to. You know, that particular case has lots of different moving parts besides just the Board of Adjustment case. But hopefully we'll have more information about all of those things. That particular decision that you have there is the appeal of the revocation that you all issued some time ago, and Judge Goodwine has upheld the position that you all took to revoke that permit. But there was never an injunction. There was not. And that ruling that she has entered is subject to appeal in 30 days from her ruling as well. So we'll have all that information, plus hopefully maybe some more information about the other surrounding cases that go along with it that aren't directly coming from this board. And will you be able to justify not having a junction against community in? Will we be able to? I've always been pushing to protect that neighborhood more than we have for the last two years. And with this last Boone Creek, that Supreme Court decision saying that how it erodes people's confidence in their government when people have a conditional use permit revoked and they don't adhere to that, it seems like we ought to talk about the damage that we're causing. We can certainly talk about that next month, and it probably would be advisable to talk about it in conjunction with some of the other things that are pending, like the HUD complaint related to that. But I would rather do that in a closed session. Okay. Thank you. Very good. Any other questions, comments? If not, we stand adjourned. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.