Lucy in the sky with love Lucy in the sky with diamonds Lucy in the sky with diamonds Lucy in the sky with diamonds Lucy in the sky with diamonds Sha-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la I'm going to speak. If you're going to speak on a case today, would you please stand and raise your right hand? Do you agree to tell the truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you very much. I'm going to go ahead and read the agenda. Before I do, are there any withdrawals or postponements? Mr. Chairman, I believe we have one postponement request from the audience, and the staff has received a postponement letter after that request letter. Yes, sir. Good afternoon. I'm Kevin Warner with Carmen. We're representing Hope Center Recovery Program for Women. It's C2015-45. Uh-huh. We are requesting a one-month postponement. How many? One month. A one-month postponement. Does anyone on the board have any objections? Staff? Very good. We'll request for a 30-day postponement. the chair will entertain a motion. So moved. There's been a motion made by Mr. Gross, and is there a second? I second. Mr. Forrester, second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. Thank you. We'll see you in 30 days. Before we begin, I should have said something a little bit earlier. We're welcoming two new members today. Brandon Gross is with me on my left, and Chad Needham filling the spots of Catherine Miller and Jimmy Griggs. So gentlemen, welcome. I'd like to go ahead, and before I read the agenda, we do have some minutes to approve, and you all have had these minutes? Mr. Chairman, if I may, before we get off postponements and withdrawals, I have passed out previously in front of your on-the-counter. The staff has received a postponement request from Councilmember Jake Gibbs of the 3rd District for a case that's located on today's agenda. The case is on page 3 of the agenda. It's C 2015-46, the Living Learning Center. It's for a property located at 163 East Maxwell Street. It's It's a request for a conditional use permit to operate a fraternity. The staff wanted to go ahead and pass out the postponement request letter from Mr. Gibbs at this time during postponements and withdrawals. It's our understanding that the applicant is here and would like to ask the board to have this item heard today. Thank you very much. Does staff have any opposition? The staff has no opposition. The staff recommendation, official recommendation, was for postponement. But also, should the board decide to hear this case today, the staff has no opposition to that either. Very good. Would the applicant please step forward for a moment? Mr. Chairman, I'm Dick Murphy. I'm representing the applicant on this. John Schrader is with me today, who's the attorney for Theta Chi, the fraternity. We would request you proceed with this. The staff had asked us for additional information, and we got all that to the staff a week ago. unfortunately when we got it to them they'd already written up their recommendation because they have to mail them to you a week in advance but we did get all that information to them a week ago so that they could could review it here's our particular situation this is a fraternity on the for you on the university of kentucky your next meeting is august 28th the university of kentucky starts before that time As you know, everything goes on the university calendar around the university area, and the fraternity needs to know before that time. We have representatives of the fraternity here today. We don't know if everybody can come back at the end of the month or not. We notified 81 parcels. 81 parcels got letters about this. I checked with the staff. They had received no phone calls of objection. They did get the one letter last evening from Councilmember Gibbs, and I think there's one other person here who may ask for postponement on this. We have a couple letters of endorsement on this one, and I want to clarify this is not a party house at all. We'd ask that you go forward and hear this. as with any case, you always have the option after you've heard the case, if you don't have enough information, you have the right to continue it to another date. I would certainly hope you wouldn't, but that is your right. But I'm confident that if you hear the case and hear what the staff's reaction to that is, I'm confident you'll be comfortable taking a vote on it. But if you're not, you obviously have the right to continue it. not so that you would repeat anything. You would not have to repeat anything in a future meeting, but just get whatever additional information you would need. And as I said, it's very important because of the schedule we have with the university on this, and we have supplied that information to the staff. So I don't know if Mr. Schrader wants to add. Thank you. Actually, Mr. Murphy, what I'd like to do, if there is someone that is in favor of the postponement, if they'd like to come up to the podium and give your name for the record, please. Thank you. I appreciate this opportunity. Yes, I would request postponement. The information, the additional information that was furnished was furnished yesterday. I got it about noon today. The additional information may or may not be sufficient to settle the concerns about the property. In particular, a plan was submitted without any dimensions and numbers. This is an R4 property. It has an open space requirement. It has a maximum footprint that's about 30%. It looks like the footprint of the building is about half or something. all of this is fine if the existing building is grandfathered in. If, however, the conditional use would constitute an enlargement of the use, of a non-conforming use, we don't have the numbers to know whether that's the case or not. And I would certainly urge against enlarging that use. I don't think you can judge that unless you know the building dimensions, the number of units, in particular the parking requirement. If there's a picture of an overhead. Ms. Clark, we're not, I've not yet vetted the agenda. So if you're in a one to 30 day, that's what I'm asking for. Yes. If you want a 30 day postponement, then you do. So I'd like to ask if there is anybody else that wants to have the postponement for 30 days. Mr. Emmons, just to clarify, when did you get the information, the pertinent information that you need, and have you had an opportunity to vet that? The staff received essentially two batches of information. There was some of the information that we requested that was received one week ago after the staff report was finalized. And then I received additional information that answered more of the questions. I believe I received that yesterday via e-mail. I do not know if it was received by the office earlier than that, but I had not seen that until yesterday. and that's when i have it marked as being received yesterday the additional information we do have should the board decide to have a hearing on this we do have copies of that information which will pass out should you choose to have a hearing on this well is there any question is there any information that you received that would that would change your mind of your recommendation your original recommendation to approve? It's really hard because at this point in the process, out of the information that we have received, I believe parking would be the number one concern that we would have to look into further. I know that the applicant has, and the information that they've provided, has tried to address some of the parking. At this point, the information has not been, I've not been able to review that with our other colleagues or my other colleagues or anything with the rest of the division. So it's really hard for me to estimate what our recommendation would be at this point. Well, what I'd like to do is I'd like to ask the board if they would like to go ahead and hear the case. Obviously, I think that some of the issues can probably be addressed. I know that you all have gathered a lot of folks here today. that's not really the primary reason that we want to proceed, but I think that we've got a lot of the information that we need. I think that if there's any questions from anybody in the opposition or any questions from staff, those can probably be answered. Would that be a correct assumption, Mr. Murphy? Yes. We have about nine people here today, and I just want to emphasize the hearing is about the use of the building. The building has been there for 50 years. It's not the nonconforming nature of the building. It's about the use of the building. And we think we have every answer you need. We think we've supplied that. But, again, we think we have all the information you need on that. And if at the end of the hearing you're not comfortable, you have the right to continue it, to get more information. I'd like to go ahead and ask the Board of Adjustment. I see no reason why we can't hear this today, but I ask the Board what their pleasure is. Mr. Emmons, if we did decide to go through with the case, do we need a motion to go forward with the case? No? No. Is anybody opposed not to hear the case? We'll go ahead. We'll hear the case, and it's probably going to be a little bit later. I'd like to get back to the agenda. the minutes of the you all have received the minutes for the May 29th Board of Adjustment meeting I know we've got a couple new members but we still have three of us that were here and it takes a simple majority to approve so I would like to ask I'd like to ask if there's no additions or deletions the chair will entertain a motion Mr. Chair I motion that we approve the minutes for May 29th 2015. And are we doing June 26th? We need to do them separately, Mr. Forrester. Is there a second? I second. Ms. Whitman, there's a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. That would be the three of us. Now I'll ask you about the June 26th minute. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. Thank you, Mr. Forrester. Is there a second? I second. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Very good. But I'm going to go ahead and I'm going to read the agenda. And obviously, one of the things that we like to do is if there is any opposition to any of the cases, and obviously we have some opposition with Ms. Clark, Mr. Murphy, and would just like to ask, as you have done in the past, if you have any differences, we'd like for you to go out in the lobby and try to work those out before we bring your case back up. because I'm hoping that we might be able to alleviate some of Ms. Clark's concerns, and then the board will decide whether or not we'll continue and vote on this today. I'd appreciate that. In calling the agenda, yes, sir, thank you. In calling the agenda, the first item is Lawrence Lott, LLC, is the applicant here. Thank you very much. Is there any opposition? Is there any opposition to Lawrence Lott? No opposition. Ben Asheri is the applicant here. Thank you. Is there any opposition to this? Okay. Gentlemen, I'll ask you two to do the same thing, to go out in the hallway, and we will hear your case a little bit later on and hope that you all can resolve any differences that you have. Mark Mason, is the applicant here? Mr. Mason, is there any opposition to Mark Mason? Is there any opposition at all to 2015-44? All right. I believe the next is the Living Learning Center. Is the applicant here? That was Mr. Murphy. Anderson Trailside Townhomes, our applicant here. Very good. Is there any opposition to, there is opposition. I, again, ask you all to do the same. And while we have back-to-back cases for Anderson Trailside Townhomes, so we would probably hear both of those cases back-to-back. So I would love to have the two of you go out and see if you can work out the differences, and we'll call your case in a little bit. Michael Van Hoosier. Is there any opposition? Is there any opposition? There is opposition to Mr. Van Hoosier as well. So, again, if you all would like to go out, I'd like for you to try and resolve any differences that you might have. We do have an administrative review for Lexmark and Mr. Nicholson back there. And obviously, if there's any opposition, I know staff will hear your report on that as well. And we'll call that in a few minutes. I believe that is all the agenda items that we have. And what we normally do is we take those with no opposition first. So I would like to ask Lawrence Lott to please come forward. Can we shut that door, please? And your name for the record? Good afternoon, Chairman. My name is Jacob Walburn. I'm appearing on behalf of Lawrence Lott, LLC. Mr. Walburn, the staff has actually recommended approval subject to three conditions. Do you agree to abide by those conditions? We have read the staff's report and agree to abide by all conditions. I'd like to ask if any of the board members have any questions. Staff? If not, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, our motion that we approve V-2015-50 Lawrence Lott appeals for a variance to increase the maximum allowable height of a front yard fence from four feet to six feet in the townhouse residential historic district overlay R1T H1 zone at 422 Lawrence, based on the staff's recommendations and the three conditions. Thank you, Mr. Forster. Is there a second? I second. Ms. Whitman seconds. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Good luck. Thank you. Next one with no opposition is Mark Mason. Would the applicant please come forward, state their name for the record. Mark Mason. Mr. Mason, the staff has recommended approval subject to three conditions. Do you agree to abide by those conditions? I do. Does the board have any questions for Mr. Mason? Staff, anything to add? If not, the chair will entertain a motion. I guess this is my party. Mr. Chair, I motion that we approve C-2015-44 Mark T. Mason appeals for a conditional use permit to establish a home occupation engraving in a single-family residential R1D zone at 6464, 8th and Boomsboro Road, based on the staff's recommendations and the three conditions. Very good. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Ms. Whitman, second. I'll signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Good luck. Good luck, Mr. Mason. The next item that we have is our Lexmark. The others, we're going to let them talk a little bit more and see if they can work out their differences. And state your name for the record, please. It's Nick Nicholson here on behalf of Lexmark. Mr. Nicholson, the staff has recommended approval subject to two conditions. Did your client agree to abide by those? We do. Very good. Is there any questions of Mr. Nicholson from the board? Anything from the staff? If not, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move approval of A-2015-41, Lexmark International Incorporated, the administrative review to transfer 42 square feet of unused wall signage to a freestanding sign in order to erect a 117-square-foot replacement sign in a light industrial zone at 740 West New Circle Road. with the staff recommendations and with the two conditions of approval. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. Is there a second? I'll second. Mr. Forster seconds. All those signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Good luck, Mr. Nicholson. Thank you. Welcome, Mr. Needham and Mr. Gross. It's very good to have you all on this team. Thank you, sir. Let's hope they continue to feel that way, Mr. Nicholson, after... Well, we still have some folks outside. Mr. Salee, would someone check on the other items that we have? Mr. Ashfari, the Living Learning Center, and Anderson Town Homes. Can we check and see if anybody's ready to come back in? Yes, sir. Do you want for me to ask for one of those in particular or just any of those? Well, I actually would probably like to hear the Ash Sherry later. I'd like to hear from Andrew. We only had one opposition for Anderson Townhomes, and if they're ready to proceed, I'd like to proceed with that. I'll go speak with the attorney right now. Thank you, sir. If you all just bear with us for a second, we'll... Thank you, Mr. Salih. Can I have the applicant step forward, please? State your name for the record. Sure. Good afternoon. My name is John Strom. I represent the applicant Anderson Trailside Townhomes. Mr. Strom, you have some opposition. Were you all able to work that out? We didn't really have enough time to really go through all of it. I'm not sure if they're easier yet than they were a few minutes ago or not. No, I think you'd still like to speak. What we would like to do then is we would like to, I know that the, I'd like to have both of these together because they're shared property, shared parking lot, and then we would vote on them separately. But as customary, we'd like to hear from the opposition before we begin. So if you have a seat for a second, and I'd like to bring the gentleman back, and please introduce yourself for the record, please. My name is Mark Robinson. I live on Old Willamill in McColl's Trace, and I'm opposed to it because I think we need to keep our green space. Least Town Road already has the tone traffic on it. We don't need to have a daycare out there. He can do that inside Townley Center. We don't need a swing pool. It's not going to enhance the neighborhood at all. It's just for his profit. I think it's going to bring too many people to the neighborhood. Like I said, traffic's already a nightmare. And why don't we just keep some of the green space we have in the neighborhood and keep it in the neighborhood and not a residential, industrial, commercial, or whatever else he wants to throw in there. Is traffic your biggest issue? Traffic and green space. I'd like to keep it trees and, you know, finally have something that's not wall-to-wall houses and buildings and people. I'd like to ask Traffic Engineering if they've had an opportunity to take a look at this and have any response. I have looked at the application. Traffic doesn't have any concerns. Okay. Thank you very much. Anything else? No, sir. Thank you. Mr. Strong, would you like to come back up and address the concern? Certainly. I'll start with the traffic concern. The site we've chosen is served by three collector roads. It's served by White Oak Trace, by McConnell's Trace, and by Trailwood itself. This provides a lot of grounds for ingress and egress. It's also centrally located to the neighborhood itself. Most of the people that are going to be using, everybody who's going to be using the clubhouse will be neighborhood residents. And the people who are going to be using the daycare, the vast majority will come from the neighborhood as well. In the centralized location, a lot of people are going to walk to it as well. We do have a large parking lot as well. We also waited until the Leedstown Road expansion was nearing completion, so entrances onto both White Oak and McConnell's Trace Boulevard would be open and available for people to use. Very good, Mr. Strom. I'd like to ask the board if they've got any questions. Mr. Strom, does staff have anything that they'd like to add? We have just passed out to you a purple page that does have a slight revision to the recommendations for this. The applicant has, since the time that they filed their original application, they have amended their site plan slightly. We have passed out those revised site plans. They are in your notebooks. We also had emailed them to you earlier. And in general, whether it's the daycare or the associated clubhouse, which is the next item on your agenda, the revisions are very slight. and they're basically tweaks. The applicant has also, both of these, this property is also subject to a development plan that the Planning Commission has approved, and the applicants have filed an amended development plan that is currently being reviewed by the Planning Commission. That site plan for the development plan would match the site plan that the applicant is asking you to act on today. The revised conditions were the result of the, after the applicant had read through the original staff report and had their revised site plan, they asked for some slight revisions so that the conditions that were being placed on it would not be in, would not be, that they would be in concert with the revised site plan. The staff agreed and recommends the six conditions, slightly revised as in your handout today. Mr. Strom, you agree? You and your client agree to these six conditions? We do agree to these six conditions. We may be back to visit number four as far as a privacy fence with another option at a later date. I know there are some different requirements that we can address, but we're not going to address that today. We do agree to these as they're submitted. All right. Thank you very much. I'd just like to, after hearing that, I wanted to give the gentleman one more opportunity if he had anything else to say. Okay, very good. Well, we have the first item, 2015-47. We would act on these separately with the revised recommendations for approval. Does the board have any questions of the applicant or the opposition? If not, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I motion that we approve C-2015-47 Anderson Trailside Townhomes, LLC, appeals for a conditional use permit to construct and operate a child care center in a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone at 2935 Trailwood Lane, also known as 2826 Leastown Road, based on the staff recommendation and the six conditions. Thank you, Mr. Forrester. Is there a second? I second the motion. Ms. Whitman seconds. All approved, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Your motion has been approved. We have the next item. And again, since this is a separate item, I'm going to give the gentleman an opportunity. Are we still talking about density and traffic? Is there anything else that you'd like to add? Okay. Mr. Strom, the staff has recommended approval subject to four conditions. Do you and your client agree to abide by those? We do as long as the site plan is a revised site plan that we submitted, which I believe it is. It is. Okay. Then, yes, we do submit to those conditions. Very good. Does anybody on the board have any questions for Mr. Strong? If not, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Mr. I apologize. We're putting the revised site plan just for clarity. It is also in your books. at this scale of the site plan the differences between what was originally submitted and and what's before you today are are so small that you can't even actually really see the difference they uh they they are very much it is a slight revision the building is slightly larger than what was originally requested well does not make an effective change to our recommendation Okay. Thank you, Mr. Irmonds. Does anybody have any questions of staff or the applicant? If not, shall we entertain a motion? Mr. Chair, I move approval of 2015-48 Anderson Trailside Townhomes. appeal for a conditional use permit to construct a neighborhood clubhouse facility in a planned neighborhood residential zone at 2945 Trailwood Lane for the reasons provided by staff and subject to the four conditions provided by staff. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. Is there a second? I'll second. Mr. Forrester, seconds. I'll signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you, Mr. Brown. Good luck. I saw Mr. Van Hooser come back. Were you in the opposition? Did you have an opportunity to discuss? Yes, sir. I think he was fine with what we discussed. Would you go ahead and state your name? Mike Van Hooser. Mr. Van Hooser, the staff has recommended approval following the five conditions. Do you agree to abide by those? We do. Very good. And just out of fairness, I wanted to ask if the gentleman had anything that he wanted to say. I believe he went on and left. He went on and left. Well, obviously he did not. So that's good. We parted amicably. Well, that's very good. And that's why we try to do this. You know, we try to see if, because a lot of times things can be worked out. There might be some misinformation or not complete information. So we always ask the opposition and the applicant to go outside. And we actually, they come back agreeing quite often. So we appreciate you doing that. I'd like to ask the board if they have any questions for Mr. Van Hoosier. If not, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, our motion that we approve C-2015-49, Michael Van Hoosier, appeals for a conditional use permit to operate an indoor recreational facility in a warehouse, excuse me, in a wholesale and warehouse business, B4 Zone at 340 and 342 Richmond Avenue and 949 National Avenue, based on the staff's recommendations and the five conditions. Thank you, Mr. Forster. Is there a second? I second the motion. Ms. Whitman seconds. All signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Good luck with the project. I have one question for you. Yes, sir. I have a three-year-old. How old do they have to be to start the soccer? We have three-year-olds playing all the time. Good. Thank you. Bring them on down. Thank you. Very good. No discounts, though, Mr. Forrest. I'd like to go ahead, then, the other, I believe, the only other two cases that we have are Mr. S. Sherry and the Living Learning Center. and I'd like to see, I'd like to hear the Living Learning Center first if they're ready and thank you very much for going out there. Am I missing anything? Is that correct? I believe those are the last two cases to hear. As they're coming to the microphone, I have several pieces of paper to pass out. I'll do that. You do? Regarding this case? Yes, sir. Okay. Mr. Murphy, Mr. Immons is passing out a few things for us. So to look at before we call you out. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Emmons, I'd like to ask if you have had an opportunity to look at these and particularly the proposed conditions of approval. Is there anything that the staff would like to add? At this point, the staff has not yet seen the applicant's proposed findings or their potential conditions of approval. We would like to review those during the course of the hearing. Okay. Mr. Murphy, you want to come up? Yes. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, if I can, The paper that I did pass out, the first two pages are information that was provided by the applicant that we've talked at length about. The last one is a letter of support that was sent in to the staff based off of this application. Talking about the University of Kentucky support and then the Maxwell Street Presbyterian Church. The Maxwell Street was a letter of support. I consider the UK letter as more of providing information also. It was provided by the applicant. Very good. Is that a first Mr. Emmons that a church supports a fraternity across the street? Mr. Murphy, you can go ahead and proceed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. When we did meet out in the hallway with Ms. Clark and did not work anything out, we thought she was coming back in here. Mr. Schrader has gone out to see if he can find her to let her know that the hearing is starting here. As I said, I'm pleased today to be representing the Living Learning Center, LLC. That's a private company which is owned by Craig Hardin, who's on the front row with me, and his wife, Carmella. And also with me today, as I said, is John Schrader, a former judge here, who is the attorney for the alumni board of the local chapter of Theta Chi. Ken Pfister, who's the president of the alumni board. And Robert Leish, who's the chapter advisor. and we have a number of other members of Theta Chi who are here on the second and third rows and we appreciate them coming down. I'll try to be brief here, but there's two threads to this story. One is the piece of property we're talking about and the second is the fraternity and how they came together. About the property itself, there's the photograph of the property and probably if you've been here in town very long, you've probably driven by this hundreds of times. I've always driven by and wondered about it with the unique open concrete block facade along the second and third floor. It's a unique building, and as I recall, when I was a kid, I think there was a tinder-crouse tender optician on the first floor and an insurance agent and some other offices like that. along with the residences above, and driving by it just casually over the years. You know, this building has had its ups and downs about occupancy. Sometimes it'll be fully occupied. Sometimes it'll be partially occupied. I think the occupancy in the upstairs two floors, which are residential, has been fairly constant. The downstairs, which is professional, has been sometimes occupied, sometimes not. The unique thing about this is that the PVA says this building was built in 1972. I think it was built earlier than that because I think I remember driving, seeing it in the late 60s. Now, 61. Craig says it was built in 1961. And when it was built, the zoning ordinance in the R4 zone allowed you to have professional offices on the first floor. That was an allowed use in R4. Today, if you built a new building in an R4 zone, you can only have residential in it. But at the time it was built, you could have professional office on the first floor of R4. I think Mr. Emmons had found an old ordinance which especially said that when you're on the edge of a zone, they allowed you to do additional things in your property at that time. They took that away. I wish we still had that, but they took that away some years ago. But it's a valid nonconforming use, which, of course, means that a use which is built legally and was legally when it was built can remain that way in the future, even though the zoning ordinance changed. So this is a legal nonconforming use with professional on the first floor and residential above it. Craig's company bought this building last year. Mr. Hardin is experienced in student housing. He was a participant in the Town and Gown Commission a few years ago, which tried to coordinate the issues between the university and downtown. He was involved in the University Area Housing Association and the Greater Lexington Apartment Association. So he's familiar with these issues. When he bought it, before he started his renovation, he talked to me about it, and I told him, yeah, you can do professional on the first floor. I checked it out. You can do residential above. and he saw the potential to do something similar to what UK is doing in its new residence halls, and that is they have instructional, social, and interactive space on the first floor of the new dormitories. He saw the potential in this building to do something similar to that. So he went to UK and talked to them about that. UK was enthusiastic about it and encouraged him. Obviously, they can't give a stamp of approval to a private developer, but he was encouraged to continue with this. And he did, and actually they supplied him a list of 12 student organizations that they thought might be interested in a space such as this. So with that information, he went ahead and did extensive renovations to this building. It looks nicer on the outside than it did before, but the big difference is on the inside. He did structural changes, he did renovations, he did systems changes, HVAC, plumbing, and all that sort of thing had to be replaced. And he did a lot of cosmetic renovations as well. It still has four, a total of five, you'd call them residential units. There's two units on the top floor, two on the second floor, one on the bottom floor, and as it always has been. The ones on the top two floors each have four bedrooms, so there are four units, four bedrooms, a total of 16 people can live there, one person per bedroom, so there's 16 people can live on the top two floors. and on the bottom floor there's going to be the graduate resident advisor who will live there along with probably the chapter president. So it's a two-bedroom apartment on the first floor on the side and then the rest of the first floor is this interactive, what used to be the professional office area. We're trying to use this interactive social and instructional area. so and the building is if I had a child living in UK this is where I'd want him to be because this has concrete floors on each of the floors and it has concrete walls between the units and it is now fully sprinkled so it is as I think fire safe as it can be as a matter of fact Craig tells me that the fire department has had trainees out to this building to look and see what Craig did to renovate this building and bring it up to current code so it's a very safe building to live in. The location, I think, is very appropriate. We've got to the east, if you can show some pictures, the second of the pictures there. This is the street scene down Martin Luther King looking south. Obviously, it's our overhang on the left of our building and the Good Samaritan Hospital, which is catty corner from us on the right side. That's, of course, owned by University of Kentucky. If you go to the next picture, we have what's across the street. I'm sorry these are so dark, but this is the Calvary Baptist Church directly across the street on Martin Luther King. It's their college student ministry building across the street from us there. It's a little better. Sorry about my pictures here. Going to the third one, this is the view to the east, and it is looking from our building to the buildings next to us. And we put this in here because this is the parking lot that is owned and operated by the University of Kentucky. And the next picture, I think I've got a picture of it from a different angle. This is looking from Maxwell Street up to our building. Our building is there on the left, right there. And the last picture is on the, is a close-up of that sign. And the reason I'm doing this is we're going to discuss parking a little bit more in a minute. But we have 11 or 12 parking spaces on site, which meets the required parking under the zoning ordinance for a fraternity. For a fraternity, you're required to have five spaces plus one space for every four beds, every five beds, which would be nine. We're required to have nine spaces on site. We have 11 or 12. So we meet our required parking. But we understand there may be times when we need additional parking or that would be helpful. The way we're going to handle that is by, number one, we're next to the U.K. campus. So most people who don't live here, if there's a house meeting, they will walk to the house meeting or ride a bicycle to the house meeting. because it's much easier to do that than, say, for a person, a student, to get out to the stadium where their car is probably parked, drive it down here, and then drive it back to the stadium and walk to their residence. It's much shorter just to walk directly here than it is to get out to the stadium. But nevertheless, we have a U.K. parking lot immediately adjacent to the east of us, and this sign details the hours of operation. you can see that from 5 a.m. to 3.30 p.m., Monday through Friday, you have to have an E sticker to park there. That's, as I understand, an employee sticker. After, from 3.30 to 7.30, anybody with any valid U.K. permit can park there, student permit, faculty, whatever, you can park there from 3.30 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. After that, it's open. And anybody can park there from 7.30 p.m., I guess, up to 5 a.m. So they would schedule any meetings they have at 8 o'clock so that this lot will be available to anybody to park. Also, there's ample parking along Martin Luther King especially and some on East Maxwell Street to meet any parking requirements. And I'll show you their parking policy in just a second here. But on the location, again, we're, I didn't go all the way around. I didn't have all the pictures. We're directly across the street to the south, or we're to the north of Maxwell Street Presbyterian Church. And so we have institutional hospital uses, parking lot. To the north, we have those condominium buildings that were built on Martin Luther King Boulevard on there. The, there you go, okay, if I can figure out myself. There's our building. There's the condominiums. And here's the, this is the Calvary Baptist Church campus ministry. This is a medical building, I think, associated with Good Samaritan Hospital. Here's our building again. Here's the parking. Our parking is in this area right here. The UK parking lot is behind us there. Good Samaritan Hospital, Caddy Corner, and this is the edge of Maxwell Street Presbyterian Church. So that's the building. We felt that this is as ideally suited for a fraternity as we could be. Many years ago, I was talking to the attorneys for the Ellsford Neighborhood Association, and they said, we want all fraternities to be west of Rose Street. Well, we're west of Rose Street, so we meet the Ellsford's. whatever their criteria was some years ago, we're west of Rose Street. But most important, we're right on the north border of campus. And as you all know, a few years ago, Martin Luther King was sort of designated the town gown corridor to connect downtown and the university. We're just a block away from South Lyme, which has the new restaurants and retail area. So it's really, I think, the place where these type uses are encouraged to be. I want to tell you about the fraternity a little bit, too. and so there's some fraternity people here. They can, if I get anything wrong, they can correct me. But for many years, Theta Chi was located on East Main Street at 509 East Main. That's where the Crossgate Gallery is right now. And that was a pretty good hike from campus. And through the years, membership sort of dissipated until the fraternity was dissolved some years ago. They had a very active alumni association, though, and the Alumni Association revived the fraternity a few years ago, and the fraternity has revived itself. They are a campus organization. Right now, I think they have about 108 or 118 members in Theta Chi. They don't have a building. They've been meeting on campus in various different locations. So the staff asked us for some information about this, and I gave that to them, but I'd like to reiterate to you. They asked about, are we requesting fraternity use for the entire building? Yes, we are, both the first floor and the second two floors, so the entire building would be used for the fraternity. second is have they been officially recognized by the university and I'm certainly glad they asked that because that lets me have you look at page one of my handout which is the letter from Vinny Sandy who is the assistant director for fraternity and sorority affairs at UK and I'm not going to read that whole letter but I think anytime a fraternity can get a letter like this they deserve to have some recognition for it. He says that Theta Chi is an award-winning chapter. They've recently been selected as the Dean's Cup recipient for our campus best overall fraternity. And it gets better. They have also won the Theta Chi National Top Chapter Award, best chapter in the National Theta Chi Award. And he says these members are high-quality young men who are respectful, intelligent, and caring. I have no concerns about their ability to be excellent neighbors and to improve the community. And he points out that as a UK-recognized fraternity, they have to subscribe to the UK Code of Student Conduct. They have certain guidelines they have to meet. Even though they're not in a facility owned by UK, they still have to meet UK guidelines for fraternities. the second letter in there on page two is from Maxwell Street Presbyterian Church and Mr. Chairman I heard your comment this is the first time I've ever heard of a church issuing an endorsement letter for a fraternity and I'm proud to present it on behalf of this fraternity and he says they this is Pastor Woody Berry that they have had the opportunity to work with members of this fraternity they're good neighbors in the downtown UK area. They volunteered with the church on projects. They've met in spaces in the church. There are members who participate in worship activities and they even have one who is an intern in the campus ministry program. So he concludes by saying we have every reason to expect a cordial and good working relationship with the fraternity and are happy to welcome them to the neighborhood. I urge you to grant this appeal. And I have pictures of those parking signs. But getting back to the information the staff has requested, which I gave them a week ago, the current total membership is 118. They expect 160 at some point. I want to emphasize, though, that they can only have 18 people living in this building, no more than 18. This is a fraternity which is campus-oriented. They have been meeting other places before. they will have meetings here but only 18 people are going to be living in this facility they do have events which will include alumni and other prospective members and that's why the first floor is there if it were not being used as a fraternity this would be considered to have five apartment units as I told you about 18 bedrooms 18 beds 18 people on parking we meet required parking because the required parking for fraternity is nine. I want to emphasize, too, that this building has always been nonconforming for parking for apartments because as an apartment house, if it were built today, it would not meet parking requirements. They could probably get a variance. It's in the infill and redevelopment area, but more spaces would be needed for that. It was nonconforming. Craig was entitled to utilize that nonconformity if this were not used as a fraternity. But, John, if you could give me that. Did you hand that out, that parking policy? I gave them to you. You gave them to me, and I didn't hand them out. Sorry about that. Here they are. If you don't find handing those out. The fraternity chapter itself, and give one to Ms. Davis and the staff here, too, had come up with their house parking plan because they recognized that they will be having meetings there and they need to deal with them. And as you can see, this was not written by us, Craig or me. This was written by the fraternity. They have 18 members to be living there. There's 12 parking spaces adjacent to the house. There are other options on Martin Luther King. they anticipate 16 members with cars they will know they will need to get spaces for the other four now whether that is a student parking pass and they park out at the stadium that may be the place if it were me that would probably be the last place I want to park but there may be other places closer that they can get but they understand they don't have on-site parking for them they said that Theta Chi will purchase K lot passes for the four members who don't have spots. K-Lot is the football parking lot where all students can park. Theta Chi has 108 active members. They meet at 8 o'clock on Mondays. That's three hours after the meters require payments. You know, our parking meters cut off at 5. You don't have to pay any after 5. So there's street parking. And he said for our meetings, the plan is for members to park on the E-Lot next to the house, which is open, as I told you, on the sign there. And they can park on the road. And finally, probably the most important last thing is that being located right next to campus, they're encouraging people to walk or ride bicycles there, and they will have a bike rack. So they have given a lot of thought to how to use this. I want to emphasize, too, that the building is not changing. Although Craig thoroughly renovated the building, the footprint did not change. The level of occupancy did not change. The parking area did not change. And as a nonconforming building, he's entitled to continue to use those. But we recognize the issues about there being meetings in the building, and the fraternity has thought those through, and I think have a very thoughtful response to those to make sure that there's no parking issue in this area on those Monday night meetings. Last, I want to address something that the staff addressed, that we applied in the name of the owner of this building. We did not apply in the name of the fraternity. And I wanted to tell you why we did that, because most of the cases before you, I think, are probably in the names of the fraternity. And that is because that there is a, usually this board has put a condition on that in the event the fraternity leaves a particular location, the next fraternity would have to come in and get a new conditional use permit request. We are requesting that that condition not be put on us, and that is because Craig has purchased this building and remodeled it with a mind to doing exactly this type of use, of having either a fraternity or a sorority or a student organization like a Christian Student Fellowship or something like that being in the building, and that's what this building is designed for at this point. He has a considerable investment in this, and we would request simply that if Theta Chi leaves this building and move somewhere else, that the next occupant of this building, if it's a fraternity or sorority, be required to be a U.K. recognized fraternity and sorority and one that subscribes to the U.K. Code of Student Conduct. That gives the control over the fraternity or sorority that U.K. has. The good thing in the recent years has been that UK recognizes that they do have control over the activities of off-campus fraternities. They are exercising it here, and they will continue to exercise that. I think I have gone over what I think I needed to go over with you. I did supply in the my handout to you got my things all spread out and I don't know if I can even find them here but the on the last two pages I do have some proposed findings and conclusions which would approve this and I'm not going to read them because those basically summarize what I've just told you please please look those over and on the last page I have proposed conditions of approval that is because I know you all almost always place conditions of approval on uses I have put on there one two and three or excuse me one and two are pretty standard conditions you put on everybody about that we have to do it in accordance with our application and our site plan we have to obtain all permits from the planning and building inspection by the way Craig already has occupancy permits for this building for the entire use I just want to tell you that we understand we have to have to do that though three states the building may provide living quarters for no more than 18 persons which is what the occupancy level is and four is any fraternity which occupies the premises shall be a University of Kentucky recognized fraternity which subscribes to the student code of conduct Craig added after he saw this we probably want to add shall be a university recognized fraternity in good standing in good standing which subscribes to the student code of conduct so that's our proposal to you i think this has been well thought out as i said craig and his wife has have invested a lot of money in this to bring this up to code make it a a very safe structure and i think there's probably no better potential location for fraternity on campus Okay. Craig has told me we may want to amend that number four to include, I should have said, as being uninclusive, fraternity or sorority or other UK recognized student group, which subscribes to the student group. Or other UK what, Mr. Murphy? Recognized student. Organization? Organization. Organization. That's the right word. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. I'd like to ask the board if they have any questions of Mr. Murphy, and then I want to hear from staff. Anybody from Mr. Forster? Yeah, I just want to ask about the signage. I think there was a question on staff on the signage, and you didn't mention that. Yeah, I think there will be a sign on this identifying as Theta Chi. Yeah, we would intend to have letters. They were on the mobile, on the front, and maybe it says written out, Theta Cotter, or maybe a sign on the curb of St. Living Letters. Okay. I'll let Craig get up and say what he just told me. I'm sorry. I'm Craig Harden. We would intend to have letters, the Greek letters, for whatever particular fraternity or sorority location on facing East Maxwell Street. And then typically underneath that, it may say, in this example, it might say Theta Chi Fraternity in script, something like that underneath it. Additionally, we would intend to put and apply for a sign, probably a 4x5 sign out on the corner that says Living Learning Center with my office's phone number for contact information for the owner. Our office is just on the next street. Thank you, Mr. Harden. Anybody else have any other questions? Mr. Schrader just told me they might want to be able to, I don't think they need a permit to fly the American flag and the fraternity flag on there. Okay. Very good. But any signs we get would have to be permitted. We have to go through the regular permitting process. I'd like to ask the staff, unless any other member has got a question for Mr. Murphy, Mr. Emmons, have you and Mr. Salee had an opportunity to look over these findings and conditions of approval? Yes, Mr. Chairman, we have, and we've also talked about this with Ms. Jones. Put up just a couple of revisions on the overhead for you to consider. All right. We need a darker pen. Yep, should have used the marker. There we go. Two of the conditions we think. Two of the conditions we believe need some revision. I'd like to start with the last one first, number five. A simple way to address the signage would just be to add what's a fairly standard condition, that it shall comply with the sign ordinance. than any allowable sign, whether freestanding or wall sign, gets a sign permit and can be erected on the building at the location of their choosing. That's really not going to be a problem for the staff. The condition number four that Mr. Murphy just mentioned, we were talking about at the same time. We think that that's a fine condition. It was offered by the applicant and that it could be expanded to, say, any fraternity or sorority. However, the other organizations probably do not fit the ordinance definition of a fraternity or sorority. There may be other means by which they could locate at this property, but it probably would involve either a different conditional use permit or it may be qualifying as a boarding house per se that would also need a conditional use permit for this number of residents. So we're not as comfortable adding the added language to condition four that was requested, but expanding it to include a sorority certainly would not be a problem for the staff. We've also looked at the findings proposed, and those are fine for the staff. Very good. I agree with you. I agree, Ms. Salee. Does anybody else have any other questions? Does anyone else have anything to add? Ms. Clark, I know that you all have got out there and talked a little bit. We're going to give you an opportunity to respond. Thank you. I did appreciate the opportunity to learn more about this application. I want to start by saying I quite agree it's a great location, and it's right near stuff that's just like it. So that sounds like a wonderful thing. I also like the thought that perhaps someone local will be building student housing and keeping more of the building and everything that goes with it in the town. I really object to the shortness of time. Enough said. Please be more courteous with the citizens and the staff in terms of getting the adequate information. A lot of the conditions are ones that I would also agree with. I'd like to ask the board to consider certain other conditions. First of all, I do agree with Mr. Murphy that the structure has not been enlarged and it's grandfathered in. It's a legally nonconforming structure. I'm not sure I agree that the use is legally nonconforming. If it's enlarged, I think it's not. Let's just go straight to the conditions that I think would matter. And could you put up the overhead of the parking? First of all, I think if the board would be willing to add the condition that the yard widths and the open space existing and the existing green space not be altered, that keeps the nonconformity. There is a new use, but it doesn't enlarge the nonconformity. That would be to not reduce the yard widths or the open space or the green space, not increase the lot coverage, that's to say the building footprint. And these are things that I don't think the applicant is contemplating doing. Then I would ask that it actually be made a condition of the use, that 16 parking spaces controlled by permit be furnished. The applicant has said that there are existing 12 spaces on the lot. The overhead, which is just a flyover, I think it's Bing, seems to show nine. I would ask that the traffic engineering approve the parking area and decide the number of spaces, that it also control the ad-requisite buffering and stormwater control. And this is pretty standard. But what's different is there are going to be a lot of people living here and a lot of social activities for 108 members and guests. So the intensity of the use, arguably also the density of the population, are being enlarged. And one way to control that, just to keep a cap on it, a reasonable cap on it, is to control the parking and to be specific about not enlarging things around the structure, like footprint and so on. So if traffic engineering approves the parking area, tells what number of spaces there are, and asks that the applicant furnish a contract, as is specified in the zoning ordinance, for off-site parking beyond the spaces available on-site. Why do I think 16 parking spaces would be enough? I think 16 would be just right because the applicant, the fraternity in their letter, said that of the 18 brothers, 16 of them will require a parking space. And I believe it's in the power of the Board of Adjustment to require beyond the minimum in parking and, in fact, in a number of other things in granting a conditional use. You add the condition that not just the minimum parking be furnished, but require the parking that is actually needed for the use. This is the parking that the applicant has said they need, and if they can furnish it off-site, that's great. Just show the contract, and there's a process for that specified in the zoning ordinance. the condition has already been added that occupancy is limited to 18 persons and I guess that does include the resident, the RA as well I strongly would advise that the conditional use permit be held by the fraternity chapter rather than the landlord this is what's customary It gives, first of all, we've learned what an extraordinarily fine fraternity this is. There's a judge vouching for them. There are alumni members. You're granting a conditional use to this fraternity. They can come back and get a conditional use for the next fraternity or sorority if that should be needed. But I think it's important that the responsible party, the one holding the permit, be actually the fraternity or sorority. An annual review, I think, comes automatically within conditional use, so it doesn't need to be a particular condition, and you've already added a condition about signage. I think, really, it's a great location, and it sounds as though there'll be very good neighbors. I do not in that regard object at all to having a fraternity, this fraternity here at this location. I do think that it will mean an increased intensity of use. That's an enlarged use beyond what the apartments with professional space on the first floor formerly had. And I think that you're in a unique position. you're absolutely empowered in granting a conditional use to set conditions that make that use right for the neighborhood. And really, I think parking is important and also keeping the bit of green space that is there. And I'm glad it is a conditional use. If there is a problem, it means citizens can have a hearing and raise concerns that may happen. So thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you, Ms. Clark. Does anyone from the board have any questions of Ms. Clark? Thank you very much. We've heard testimony from, obviously, from the applicant, from the opposition, and we have revised the five conditions. I do feel, Ms. Clark, quite frankly, that the applicant has met the requirements. Staff seems to be supportive of it. You know, anytime you're working around a university, you know, the density is extremely high, And I think, in my opinion, I think the applicant has met their obligations. And certainly I know that we would have liked to have had things a little bit timelier, but I think staff has had a time to review, and I think our board has had a time to review. And I'd like to ask any members of the board if they have any other questions that they would like the applicant, staff. Obviously, Casey, traffic engineering does not have an issue. and so I think that if any member of the board would like to ask a question please do so and if not I'd like to move forward. Hearing no questions the board will entertain a motion and of course Mr. Slead just so Mr. Emmons just so we get this right if there is a motion to approve and a second to approve they will be subject to the conditions as proposed and agreed to, Mr. Murphy, by your client? Yes, sir. Very good. Mr. Chair, I move that we approve C-2015-46 Living Learning Center, LLC, appeals for a conditional use permit to allow the operation of a fraternity in a high-density apartment or for a zone at 163 East Maxwell. Well, based on the staff recommendations and the five conditions that were put up. Mr. Forster, is there a second? I second. Mr. Whitman seconds. For the board votes, probably should just be clarified that the findings are provided by the applicant in this case and not the staff. Thank you. Did it revise that? Yes. That those findings are provided by the applicant. And I'll make a motion based on those five conditions. Thank you, Mr. Forster. Thank you, Mr. Salina. Ms. Whitman, you second? I just second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Good luck with the project. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. I believe our last item, and I appreciate the patience of... Yes. Go ahead. Mr. Forrester has to step out for a few moments, but we still have a majority of the board. And Mr. Afshari, the applicant is here. Would you come and state your name for the record, please? My name is Ben Afshari, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Afshari, I know that we continue this, and we appreciate your patience. I know that you were going to be talking to the neighbors regarding conditions and so forth, and I would like to ask if you all were able to come to an agreement. I think so. Yes. Sure. Okay. You can have a seat. Let me ask you if they all agree, and I see, Mr. Emmons, let me ask you, I know that these conditions to be included were just added, And have you all had a time to review them? I'd like to hear from staff. Thank you, sir. I do have some hard copies I will pass out to you. Okay. Give us just a moment. I'm sorry, sir. If you want to come to the microphone and introduce yourself, you can't speak from the floor. Well, I wasn't going to speak. I was just going to tell you that there was an updated version of that, and I can pass it out to you. Okay. Well, I think we've already got it. Is this what we've got, what this gentleman was going to pass out? Not if this is both. There was an agreed-upon change that was made after that was sent in, and I can pass out that latest version. Why don't you go ahead and do that? And your name, sir? I'm Bennett Bayer. Yes, Mr. Bayer. Just had to have that for the record. We'll let Mr. Bayer pass this out, Mr. Ashari, and take a look at it real quick and have Mr. Emmons and Mr. Salee as well. and that reads uh no parking by residence employees guests or guests of the bed and breakfast is allowed on or on the side of jenny kate that seems to be a pretty reasonable request I don't think your folks plan on parking on the side of the road anyway, but is that acceptable? Yes. Very good. Mr. Emmons? Thank you, sir. The staff also received the, first of all, this is a continued hearing from the previous case. The staff has received this morning and looked at the conditions to be included in considering that the small change that was proposed in number eight. That part, I don't have any difference on that. There were three conditions that the staff would like to point out to the board and bring up as a. I'm sorry, Mr. Three additions. No, I'm sorry, three of the conditions to be included. And I want to make this very clear. The staff in no way wants to stand in between the applicant and the neighbor from working together. There were just three of the conditions and primarily the wording of the conditions that the staff wanted to bring to the board's attention before you chose to act on the subject property. The first condition that the staff does have some concern about is item number two on the agreed upon conditions. And that one says that one tasteful sign at the corner of Rosalie and Jenny Kate placed in compliance with the LFUCG regulations and approval of the landowner. And a small marker may be placed at the edge of the F. Shari property, the subject property, and no other signage on Jenny Kate or Rosalie. uh the staff would like to point out that at at this time the article 17 of the zoning ordinance would not allow this this bed and breakfast to have an off-site sign at the corner of rosalie road and jenny kate lane and so i i believe that it would be confusing if the board passed a condition saying that it was allowed but the zoning so you're saying mr emmons that the that But the part that says one taste will sign at the corner of Rosalie and Jenny Kate, that needs to be struck because it's not allowed by current ordinance. Is that correct? Under our current regulations, it is not allowed. And do you have an issue with that, Mr. Scharri? No, that's not. Mr. Chairman. Okay. And then also on the language, I do not know exactly. we might want to discuss a little bit further on what the small marker would be and how the staff, when a sign permit did come in for this bed and breakfast, what is small. There's a certain amount of signage that would be allowed for this use. And I think if this were to be adopted as a board condition, that the staff would need a little bit more, you know, a little bit more at today's hearing. Shari, can you describe what kind of sign or size of sign you have in mind? Whatever that's allowed. So, Jimmy. We can open up Article 17 in a moment and kind of go over that. The other two conditions. Well, let me just ask you this. As long as we decide to change this condition, couldn't it continue to, say, the small marker placed at the edge of the Shari property as long as it conforms to the zoning ordinance or the sign ordinance? Would that be okay? That would be okay with the staff. A marker on the property that complies with Article 17. I do not know if that necessarily between the applicant and the neighbor whether that would suffice or not. That would satisfy the government. Seems to be. Okay. That's fine, Kim. Okay. The other wording that the staff was concerned about were in items 12 and 13, and not the substance of what the applicant or what the agreement is, but in the wording of it. 12 is essentially asking for a one-year review but it's very it's very lengthy and it and it and it goes on to essentially copy the ordinances that are already in the zoning ordinance and the regulations the staff would propose just a much simpler condition and a more typical condition that there will be a one year that the there will be a one-year review of this conditional use a one-year review of of this conditional use of this conditional use period yes i believe that would be and delete the other language and and delete the other language should should everyone agree so everyone agrees is anyone opposed to a one-year review of of the conditional use i have no problem that's standard that As long as the actual condition says the one-year review and accordance with law, I don't have a problem with that. Very good. Okay. And the final is in much the same vein, compliance with all of the provisions of LFUC ordinances regarding conditional use permits. And they go in to talk about the bed and breakfast facilities. I believe that the staff has already covered that in the staff-recommended conditions in our staff report. Condition number five recommends that the bed and breakfast be in compliance with all applicable state and local laws, including those of Fayette County Health Department and the residents that meet all applicable fire and safety codes. Also, at the beginning of that is the very definition of a bed and breakfast, which has these same conditions in here. I believe 13 is also redundant. Is 13 somewhat redundant? I believe it is redundant, and I believe that that condition is already covered. If it's my understanding, which is I should have led off with this, it's my understanding that are the applicant and the neighbor proposing these as all of the conditions or these in addition to the staff recommended conditions? That was a little bit unclear. Mr. Rear, you'll need to come to the mic. You'll need to come to the microphone and not speak from the floor. Mr. Chairman, again, item 13, very similar to 12, is a reiteration of what is required by the ordinances so that Mr. Afshari would know exactly what they are. It does not necessarily have to be set out verbatim as long as the actual condition incorporates the provisions of the applicable ordinances. That's fine. But this way, Mr. Afshari knew exactly what they are. Very good. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. With that in mind, if it's the concept that these additional conditions would be in addition to the staff recommendation of the six conditions that we recommend, in that case, I would recommend just deleting item number 13. Deleting item number 13? And also, some of this is just also a practical matter. If the regulations are already there, they don't need to be repeated. And, again, I appreciate Mr. Veer explaining this a little bit more in detail for Mr. O'Shea, and I certainly understand that. So if we move forward with this, Mr. Emmons, then if we vote to approve, and obviously, again, we appreciate the applicant and the neighborhood working it out, will we need to just go ahead and add the additional conditions and a revision of number 12, strike number 13? How would the motion need to read? At this point, I would recommend that the board, if you're going to recommend approval subject to the reasons provided by the staff, including the six conditions recommended by the staff, and then include a revised 12 additional conditions, that were agreed upon by the applicant. And the revisions would be to item number 212 and deleting 13. 212 and eliminating 13. That's a mouthful. Believe it or not, I'm trying to make it as easy as I can. I know you are. I know you are, and we appreciate that. I'd like to ask if any of the board has got any questions of the applicant or Mr. Bayer, anybody have questions of the staff? I have a question, not to put a kink in this or make it more confusing, but number six on the conditions that were provided today talks about proportionate financial participation on the cost of repairing or repaving Jenny Kate Lane. I mean, that's a private street, and so I just don't want the board or our zoning enforcement people to get caught in the middle of a private agreement they have about paving if they don't agree to what's proportionate because we don't have any jurisdiction over the private street paving. So if, I mean, if they want to make it subject, you know, that it'll be subject to a private agreement between the parties or something, that, I think that would be okay. I just don't know, you know, the way it reads, it's making it a condition that there will be proportionate financial participation in the cost to repay, but it will become a condition on this conditional use permit as it will be, you know, recorded and memorialized. And I don't know, I just don't want them coming back to you all in two years from now saying, well, we don't agree on what the proportionate cost is when we don't have any control over that anyway. Correct. And I agree with that. How would that need to be stated then, the cost of repair to be agreed upon by? i mean i i think you can say that you know that um the parties will agree to um or the parties will maintain a private agreement for cost and repair of jenny caitlin would that be sufficient that's okay with me um i mean that may be what they meant but i just want it to be clear right if that's okay if bill or jimmy has they might have some more input on that but or casey might i don't know but we were just discussing that up here we don't want to get get in a situation of putting our zoning enforcement folks onto private paving issues. Right. We can't deal with that. Why would we not just strike it? Well, we could do that as well, and they can have a separate agreement, but if they want to note that they're going to have a separate agreement, but it would still be between them. Is there not already some kind of an agreement on the private road? I mean, I think there may be an obligation. I don't know. We know we have to fix this road. The road needs some repair or redoing. I think what Ms. Whitman is asking, is there any current agreement with the property owners on the road for any repair? I don't believe any written agreement, but we agree we need to fix the road. And if he draws up an agreement, I'll sign it. I don't have any problem signing a private agreement, really. Ms. Whitman, we don't have it formalized yet, but I think that we can live with the notion that it'll be subject to a private agreement between the parties, and then once we get that executed, if we have to enforce it, we'll do it outside the boundaries of this body. I also have the same issue could actually come up on number five, the reinstallation of plank fence between Afshari and Bayer. That could also be an issue, but I will sign an agreement with Mr. Bayer to do that. because I don't want to hold, I don't think we need to hold the city and the county responsible for private issues. Well, does that even need to be on here, Ms. Jones? I believe, is there zone-to-zone? Well, I don't know. There's no fencing requirement in the zoning for this. So, yeah, we probably should make that also just a private agreement. You can make both 5 and 6. That can be reinstallation of the plank fence between Afshari and Bayer property subject to agreement by property owners or something like that? Well, isn't it often when someone does develop a plan, they have to put in buffering and other things where they have to install fencing? Wouldn't this be very similar to that? There is, but that is primarily whenever you have two zones of differing intensities, whenever you have zone-to-zone. In this particular case, both the subject property and the adjoining property are both zoned agricultural. There is not an automatic requirement for any fencing or buffering between the proposed facility and the neighboring property. However, being a conditional use, should the board feel that there is a need for additional landscaping or screening or fencing, you can certainly require that. Here's what I would suggest. on number five is that you could leave it reinstallation of the plank fencing between off sherry and and bear property will be subject to a private agreement and the same thing could be said for number six that you know or that the cost to repave or repair jenny kate lane will be subject to a private agreement should we then have a time limit because I'd hate for Mr. Ashari to spend a lot of money and effort, and then 60 days down the road there's no agreement and he can't open up his B&B. Well, we have a one-year review on the property. Could there be a timetable put in that this? With the large number of conditions that are being talked about here at the one-year review, It'll be, you know, we'll be looking at how are each of the conditions being met. Have there been any problems associated with this use in the last year? So the one-year review kind of gives that an automatic. But also, too, I think, too, Mr. Grossman, we're talking about Mr. Beer and Mr. Ashari. You know, they're going to agree upon this. and, you know, they can come up with the time limit as far as I'm, is that something that we need to weigh in on? Or should it be part of that condition? I think the board can weigh in on it if you want. I think also, as Mr. Emmons said, the one-year review is a logical time to review the progress. Is that okay, Mr. Gross? Okay. Well, that can be part of the one-year review. Is that amenable? That's okay with me. I can speak to that if I get up there. Okay. Because I'd like to comment on that. Okay. All right. Is there anything else any of the board members would like to ask? Mr. Emmons, do you have all these changes down? Most of them. Where I have been making my notes have been on the original. And so when I put this up on the board, keep in mind that number eight is what was passed out. to you during the hearing. We're going to put this on the board and we'd like for both of you to look at these changes to make sure that they're amenable. My eyes are too old. Well, so are mine. And in number two, the intent was to delete the freestanding sign at Rosalie and Jenny Kate Lane and to leave it so that there would be one small marker on the subject property per Article 17 of the zoning ordinance. So the type of sign that would be allowed by the zoning ordinance. the next proposed change would be to item number six i believe that the that miss jones had just talked about and i believe that as far as wordsmithing you can leave number six the way that it is and just add at the end to that subject to a private agreement i'm sorry what's the same and the and the same with number five my my chicken scratch was trying that was the earlier iterations on that. Number eight was proposed to be changed by the applicant, and I'm sorry, but I don't have that to stick up on the board right now, but it was passed out to the board. For number condition 12, the staff would just simply, well, I didn't finish that one, but the staff would just simply recommend that this use shall be reviewed in one year. Very good. It doesn't need to be complicated. And then the deletion of item number 13. And it would be the staff's recommendation that all of these would be in addition to the six conditions recommended by staff. Very good. Thank you. Mr. Behr, did you have something that you wanted to say before we do? Mr. Chairman, I would like to bring up an issue that my wife brought up, and that is condition number six here. There is already a light on a pole in our yard. I'm not sure if that is going to be a problem or not. It is the pole, it's a telephone pole, and there is a light all the way on the top. It's been there forever. Do I need to change that for any reason? Because it says it can't be more than eight feet high. I believe we're going to try and say any new lighting. Oh, okay. What's that, Ms. Jennings? I believe we would say any new lighting. Any new lighting? No. Okay. What's that, Ms. Jennings? Any new outdoor? Any new outdoor lighting. Without any new outdoor lighting. Any new outdoor lighting. That should be addressed. Anything else, Mr. Afshari? No, that's it, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Berry, did you have anything to add? Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple of free facts. Nothing that's going to cause any great consternation, I don't think. One of the things that Mr. Afshari provided for us, and if you'd like to put this up, I'd like to make that part of the record. That is the schematic drawing for the parking that Mr. Afshari prepared to show how they're planning on doing the parking so as to make sure that there is no parking on Jenny Kate. And as you look at the schematic, and perhaps if you can darken that up just a little bit, it'll be a little bit clearer. You'll see to the very right area where that says grass, that's actually a paddock. So he would be allowed to park into that area, and he may gravel it or something. The grass in the area that we're talking about would be up above at the very top, which is where Jenny Kate runs, and so that's the restriction. But if we can make that as just part of the record, that would be fine, and then that way there would be reference capable to go back to that. In addition, I would like to talk about as far as the recommendations of the board and at such time as the findings are made, There's a couple of changes, or at least I would like to voice my opinion regarding some of the expressions put forth by the staff. It indicates the existing home and parking area are large enough to accommodate the proposed use of bed and breakfast. The current parking as it is now might be sufficient. We're not 100% sure, but based upon, and if the findings were to be based upon the conditions that are agreed upon between the neighborhoods and the applicant, then we do think that the circumstances are sufficient to provide for the bed and breakfast. Without the conditions, there would be a parking issue associated. The second statement within the staff's recommendation says no adverse impacts on the neighborhood are expected as a result of this use. without the additional conditions, I think that there would be a significant adverse impact on the neighborhood, and that's why it's important that the findings indicate that the additional conditions are there to prevent any adverse impact upon the neighborhood. Last, as it relates to the findings, it says that the subject properties are about one-half mile from each other via the traveling distance along the existing driveways and roads. And in fact, we don't need to put it up right now, but the area map was put up last time. Jenny Kate goes up into Rosalie, and then it heads north along Rosalie until it comes to the driveway where the other bed and breakfast is. If you travel all the way up Jenny Kate and all the way down the driveway for the other bed and breakfast, it might be a half a mile. but what the staff seems to have overlooked is that there's one piece of property between these two bed and breakfasts. So it's actually a misstatement to say that they're a half a mile distant from each other. They are only the 750 feet between the two of them because one property, the Swans property, sits now between two bed and breakfasts. And I'd like for the findings to specifically exclude any reference to a half a mile because that's really not an accurate assessment of what's at play here. As it relates to the additional conditions that the neighborhood and the Afsharis have agreed to, the only circumstance that I would like to make reference to is, and I speak for myself but I also speak for the entire neighborhood, that reinstallation of the plank fence between the Afsharis and my property, I think it can be issued as a condition of the permit because there is a separation between these. It creates a separation between these two properties, between now what is a commercial property and a non-commercial property. And I think that I'm hopeful that the Afsharis and I are going to be able to get this accomplished quickly because, candidly, I don't want one year to go by and then all of a sudden we're looking at a fence to be placed just in time for an annual review. So what I would ask is at least that the board put some sort of time limitation upon when the fence would be placed and also a time limitation upon when we're going to be able to get the contribution toward the road improvements. And other than that, I very much appreciate the consideration given by the board, but if you would take up those two matters along with the adjustments that I would like to be made in the findings, that's all I have to say, Mr. Chairman. Very good, Mr. Baer. Does anyone have any questions to Mr. Baer? Mr. Emmons, do you have any issues with amending some of your findings as requested by Mr. Baer? Do you agree with him? As we were listening to the request on the findings, we have drafted some language for changes to the findings as he's requested. I do believe that they're unnecessary, but making these changes also does not have an impact on, does not have a substantive impact on our recommendation. So should the board wish to, it would be adding a phrase in the staff recommendation approval for the conditional use permit and adding that phrase as a result of the extensive conditions imposed and adding to the reason why it's appropriate. And then the part about removing the half mile driving distance. I don't believe that it's necessary that you remove that, but should you wish to remove that, I don't think it has a negative effect on the recommendation. No, that's fine with me, Mr. Chairman. The thing I'm concerned about is if there were ever anything that would go awry on this with the review or whatever, those circumstances has changed now are the basis for why this board would approve the conditional use permit, And I think it's much more important that we narrow the scope of the reasons why so it very clearly delineates the purposes involved. And that's why I think that's important. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Beer. Thank you. Ms. Jones, what do you think about, should we put a year condition on the board? Let me ask you regarding the fence. You know, I'm reluctant for the board. I mean, there's not a, it's the same zone. There's two different uses, but one is a conditional use allowed in the zone. It's a condition that they are going to have to agree to, but I'm a little reluctant to put time limits or limitations on the money, which are things I don't think this board can enforce. If it was a conditional use in another zone or backing up or something like that, It might be more of an issue that the board might have some authority over, but it's really going to be subject to their own agreement. And also the road. I mean, the road is entirely private. It's up to the people that live on it. I agree. I agree with both of those. And obviously, we've come a long way as far as finding some common ground and adding the conditions. And we have added the condition of defense, you know, that agreement between the two of you. And I don't feel comfortable adding a time limit on it, and I certainly don't want to get involved in the road situation because it is a private road. I think that we've reached some very, very good compromise here. Ms. Whitman? I've got one question on signage. I have a problem with a small marker. I think that's subjective. why not just say signage is to be in compliance with the sign ordinance? I think that would be acceptable. I mean, when they go to get a sign permit, they're going to get what they are allowed under the ordinance. Is that just a matter of language then? That's just a matter of language, marker sign. They're synonymous. That's small. Very good. You know, I think it could be, let's see, I don't remember exactly what the condition said, but you could just take it out to say, you know, a sign will be placed. Wherever you had small market could just say a sign, you know, at the edge of the property conforming to the sign ordinance. I don't remember exactly how we changed that. Condition number four in the staff recommendation is that any signage for the bed and breakfast facility shall be in accordance with Article 17 and limited to two square feet in size and that it not be internally eliminated. Where the agreed condition number two will go further on that is kind of directing that that signage shall be placed at the edge of the Afshari property. So the two conditions are not in conflict with each other, But, and they're not, they're a little bit repetitive, but the staff recommendation just has the basic per the zoning ordinance. Number two, with the agreed condition, would say kind of also where that placement needed to be. But they are both primarily saying the same thing? They are both primarily saying the same thing. Okay. Ms. Whitman, did any other? my uh my comment was just on the uh the way it was written a small marker and i think it just needs to be signed or the signage not not to describe right well and that'll be that'll be taken care of when they when they apply for the permit okay is there anybody else that has anything to add. I'm looking forward to somebody else making this motion. Mr. Chair, should I announce I'm going to abstain from the vote that's going to be coming up due to the fact that I was not here for the last meeting and I did not get an opportunity to watch the recorded minutes from last meeting? That is correct. And I think that that would be the same. And I would follow the same. Mr. Please note Mr. Gross and Mr. Needham are going to be abstaining from this vote since they were not able to be here at the last hearing. So with that said, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move approval of CV 2015-40, appeal for a conditional use permit to establish a bed and breakfast with up to five rooms and a variance to reduce the required one mile distance to 752 feet in the agricultural rural zone at 4950 Jenny Kate Lane. Subject to the recommendations as listed for the approval of the requested conditional use permit and the recommendations for the approval of the requested dimensional variance. Do we have changes in that one? Either one of those? Should you choose to modify the findings? They are listed up on the board as discussed. Okay. As listed on the board and approval subject to the following conditions. Following six conditions, with number six being changed to say that any new outdoor lighting used for this property be limited to a maximum of eight feet in height, and also other conditions to be included as proposed by Mr. Bayer. Twelve, 13 are proposed, eliminating number 13, changing number 2 to read a sign. may be placed at the edge of the Ashari property in compliance with the sign ordinance. Number five, reading reinstallation of the plank fence between Ashari and Bayer property subject to private agreement. Number six, proportionate financial participation in the cost to repave or repair Jenny Kate subject to private agreements. I'm on a roll. Is there anything else? Number 12, reading review after one year of conditional use according to KRS 100-2374 shall apply. Did that get it all? I believe so. Just for clarity's sake, on the agreed number 8, that would be the one that was submitted at the hearing, not the... Okay. You don't need to change it. It was submitted at the hearing. Okay. Wanted to make sure that was clear. And including number 8 that was submitted at this hearing. Yes. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. You're a very brave lady. I'm going to take the easy route. I'll second her motion. Ms. Whitman makes a motion to approve, and Mr. Forster seconds the motion. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Your motion carries. I want to make a comment to Mr. Ashari and Mr. Bayer. You know, this continuance was really good. I know that there was some hesitation last month, but, you know, that's one of the things that I think this board does is we want to make sure that the neighborhood is satisfied, and we like to see such positive discord and communication between the two of you, and it was all worked out. And I personally, you know, enjoy seeing that sort of democracy in action and neighbors being able to iron things out. So I just want to applaud both the neighborhood and Mr. Barry, you and Mr. Shari, you, for having a meeting of the minds and coming back here. It's something that we can all agree on. I certainly know as a board we feel a lot more comfortable when we see neighbors work any of their differences out. So thank you all so much for being here, and good luck with the project, and there will be a one-year review. So thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Lord. We do have a couple board items, and we have to elect new officers. We had two of our officers that are no longer with us, our secretary, Mr. Griggs, and then our vice chair, Ms. Miller, are no longer here with us. And so what I would like to do is this is something that we need to proceed with, I understand. So what I'd like to do is see if there might be some recommendations. The last time, after the very sudden and sad passing of Mr. Stout, But I assume the chair, and I know Mr. Glover had also some interest in it. And what I would like to ask the board, if they would be opposed to recommending that Mr. Glover possibly serve as vice chair. And Mr. Forster, unless it's something that you would like to do, or Ms. Whitman. And obviously we need a secretary as well. I know Mr. Glover is not here. Ms. Myers is not here. I know we just appointed Ms. Myers to the landscape committee. And Ms. Whitman, not to put you on the spot, but I don't know if you might be interested in becoming the secretary of the board. You know, generally a good politician has his votes counted before the meeting. But, of course, we do not do that at the Board of Adjustment. But I would like to ask the board's consideration to name Mr. Glover or recommend him as the vice chair and Ms. Whitman as the secretary, if that's something that she would agree to. So we need a motion, Mr. Saleem, Mr. Emmons. Can we do both of them together? Yes. Mr. Forrester? Yes, so move. I would recommend that we make Mr. Glover, or recommend Mr. Glover for the vice chair and also recommend Ms. Whitman as the secondary for the Board of Adjustments. Very good. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Mr. Gross. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? I hope Mr. Glover's not mad at me. But, you know, he's not here, so it's his own fault. So that's his problem. Now, the next item, the delegation of secretarial duties, in the past they've been delegated to the planning manager or a staff member. The chair will request action. You know, you all do a magnificent job, so are we asking you all to continue the delegation of secretarial duties? Generally, unless Ms. Whitman would like to. Ms. Whitman, would you like to take the minutes? I think this should have been determined before. Typically, it's whoever was appointed secretary will make a motion to delegate their duties. I move to the staff to delegate my duties or the secretarial duties to the planning staff. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. Is there a second? Mr. Fortes, there are seconds. I'll signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Very good. We have one last item, and that is closed session, and I believe Mr. Forrester, you have something in front of you. Yes, Mr. Chair, I move that we go into a closed session, present to KRS Chapter 61, in order to discuss the pending litigation. Thank you, Mr. Forrester. Is there a second? Second. Ms. Whitman, all in agreement, signify by saying aye. Aye. We're in closed session. Anything, Mr. Salee? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have nothing to add. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anyone else? We'll announce that the next meeting of the Board of Adjustment will be August 28, 2015 at 1.30. We will see you all then, and thank you very much for your service. And I want to thank the staff and thank the board. And, again, welcome Mr. Gross and Mr. Needham to the Board of Adjustment. And we stand adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.