The Midnight, not a sound from the pavement Has the moon lost her memory She is smiling alone In the light Welcome to Miami the cool ocean breeze is blowing across the face of the city and it certainly is an unseasonable day in Lexington welcome to the February meeting of the Board of Adjustment before we start on sounding the agenda there's one important piece of business that we need to take care of before we hear any cases Barry Stumbo, would you please come forward and stand at the podium if you would. I've got just a couple of things to say. I just found out about an hour ago that Brandon Gross is not going to be here, so it falls to me as deputy to fulfill this function, and I'm pleased to do it, quite frankly. Boards of adjustment exist for the purpose of granting equitable relief to the strict application of zoning ordinances to property within the Lexington, Fayette County, and other communities across the nation. I don't know how a community could exist without it. We are a volunteer board. we are required to file a conflicts sheet every year showing that we have no conflicts with anything coming before the board or any business of the urban county government and if we had connections to the urban county government we'd be disqualified from serving on the board. We receive no compensation for this. all of the members serve voluntarily, volunteer our time, not only here in this meeting on camera, but also when we examine the properties that come before us and the applications that come before us for the various things that we hear. Barry Stumbo served as a member of this board for ten years, Barry? It was ten and a half. Ten and a half years, and ten and a half years of meritorious service should be punishment enough. So it's with great pleasure that we present to you a couple of things, And I'm going to come down there and give them to you because Chad is going to take a picture of us when I get down there. The first is a resolution by the members of the board honoring you for your service to the board and as its chair for many years. And the second is a hammer, a gavel, I'm sorry, a gavel, which Brandon got, which you can take. And both of these are yours to keep, and I'll come down there and get them to you. Thank you very much, Tommy. Thank you. and my wife doesn't listen to me anyway, so I wouldn't be able for it to be very effective. But serving on the board for the last ten and a half years has been a real honor for me. And I was originally appointed by the Planning Commission and then subsequently by two of our mayors, Mayor Gray. And so I really appreciate that. And it's been working with the board, working with the staff. I think the staff has done a tremendous job, and Bill, and your leadership and Mr. Marks. and Tammy and now Autumn and certainly the legal staff and transportation and everyone else. I mean, it's just been wonderful to work with. But it's really been the highlight of my professional career to serve this city, and hopefully we've done that in a fair and impartial manner. I know that, Tommy, as you said, Mr. Chair, this is a volunteer position. We don't get paid for it, but we do it because we love this city and we want to give back to this city. And so it's been a real pleasure and an honor to serve, and I appreciate the proclamation. I appreciate the gavel, and obviously I meant a lot to Brandon because he's not here today. So anyway, you give him my best, and I thank you all very much, and I think the Board of Adjustment, I think we've got a terrific board here that's serving this community. So thank you so much, and I wish you the very best. Thanks again. Thank you, Barry, and good luck to you in the future. Thanks, Gary. Thank you, John. Let's get to it. Thank you, Jack. Thank you, Barry. Thank you, Jack. Okay, folks. First thing I want to say is please turn off or silence your mobile phones so we don't have any interruptions. I'm going to sound the agenda after we take a vote on the approval of the minutes for January 27th. Has everybody on the board read the minutes? If so, I will entertain a motion. I move we approve the minutes for January 27th. Thank you. I second the motion. Thank you. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Minutes are approved. The next thing that I'll do is to stay on the agenda, and what we're going to do is we're going to go through each case. There are several cases on the agenda. We'll go through each case, and if there is opposition, I'll ask you about that as well. We're going to hear those cases in which there is opposition to the application last. So those unopposed will go first. Mr. Chair, sorry to interrupt, but we do have one withdrawal that Autumn's going to fill you in on. Yes, Mr. Marks, thank you. What is it? Item number five, PLNBOA 17-8, Showprop Pico Rivera LLC has withdrawn their application. And that one was withdrawn? Sorry? Was that withdrawn? Withdrawn. Okay. So it doesn't require a motion. And do we have any postponements? I understood we had one postponement. We'll get to it as we sound the agenda. First one on the agenda is 17-10, Vincent Zsao. Is the applicant in the audience? Mr. Zsao is present. Is there any opposition to the application of Vincent Zhao? Hearing none, we'll hear you right after we sound the rest of the agenda. Number two is 17-2 YMCA of Central Kentucky as the applicant present. YMCA, are you present? YMCA is not present? We're going to pass that then until later in the meeting. Hopefully YMCA will make an appearance. Number three is Duke Road Personal Care as the applicant in attendance. Mr. Solomon, is there any opposition to Duke Road? Yes. One in opposition? Okay. We'll hear you last. Yeah. Our standard procedure on those where there is opposition is to ask the parties and the representatives of both sides to step out in the hall while we hear the rest of the agenda to see if you all can come to some kind of agreement or conclusion that will take care of that objection. If you don't mind the two of you all stepping out in the hall, talking it over, and hopefully if you can resolve it, you'll let us know later. The next item on the agenda is Bryan Station Baptist Church. Is the applicant present? Is there any opposition to Bryan Station Baptist Church 17-6? Any opposition? Hearing none, we'll hear you shortly. The next is 17-7 Total Grace Church. Is Total Grace Church present? I see you present. Is there any opposition to Total Grace Church? One in opposition? What I'd like to do is I understood the staff had a recommendation of postponement on this one. And we'd like to hear that. Let me see. What do we do on those? Do we hear those after we sound the agenda? Or when do we take that up? You could do it now if the applicant's agreeable to the postponement, depending on what the concerned party has to say about that. Okay. Well, since there's opposition to it, let's postpone it, and we'll hear it at the end of the agenda after I sound the agenda, and we'll take that up later. 17-8 is withdrawn. 17-4, Administrative Review, the summit is the applicant present. Applicant is present. Is there opposition to 17-4, the summit? No opposition. The next item is 17-1 Eddie Hunt. Is the applicant present? Seeing it is, is there any opposition to 17-1 Eddie Hunt? Seeing none, okay. What we're going to do now then is to go through, and here are the ones for which there was no opposition. The first one is PLN BOA 17-00010, Vincent Zou. mr zau if you'd come up to the podium please have you read the staff report have you read the staff report uh no you're not there there is a staff report uh that was created by the staff recommending approval and if you haven't read the staff report, you probably haven't read the condition. Is that correct? No, I haven't done that. Well, the condition reads as follows. The basketball goal or other physical barrier shall remain at the shared edge of the private walkway and the new paving to delineate the walkway as such and to prevent vehicles from being parked on the walkway. Right. Do you agree with that condition? Yes. Okay. Any questions by the Board of the applicant or to the applicant? Any questions by staff? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move approval of PLN BOA 170010, Vincent Zal, a variance to reduce the required setback for a parking area from six feet to zero feet, and to eliminate the required separation between the private walkway and parking area in a single-family residence in R1D zone at 2208 Chesapeake Court. And the reasons why? Oh, I'm sorry. And upon staff's approval for the two reasons they have given and subject to one condition. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. Do I hear a second? I'll second. Thank you. Mr. Needham, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye as well. Any opposed? Hearing none, the application is approved. Good luck to you. Thank you. Thank you. let's see the YMCA wasn't here so we'll take that up at the end the next without opposition is Bryan Station Baptist Church applicant come forward please And tell us your name. Brent Spears. Mr. Spears, have you read the staff report? Yes, sir, I have. And do you agree to abide by the three conditions? Yes, sir. Any questions by the board, Mr. Spears? no questions any questions from the staff or to the staff about the report hearing none i'll entertain a motion um mr chair i move we approve uh boa 17-06 bryan station baptist church requests for conditional use permit for a school for academic instruction in an agricultural ar zone at 3175 Briar Hill Road for the two reasons recommended by staff and subject to three conditions outlined by staff. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Do I hear a second? Second. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye as well. Any opposed? Hearing none. Good luck to you. Okay. Thank you, sir. The next one on the agenda is Total Grace Baptist Church. Do we have opposition to Total Grace Baptist Church? We did? Yes. So we'll hear that at the end. Show prop PICO 17-8 was withdrawn. Shuffling papers up here. The next is the 17-4, the summit. Is the applicant present? If you are, come up to the podium, please. Tell us your names. Aaron Anderkin. And I'm Craig Harris with the developer. Okay. We've got an email that was sent to the staff, and we're going to pass this around. So give us a second while we pass this around, and we'll hear you in just a minute. Thank you. uh mr anderton and mr harris uh have you all read the staff report we have and uh do you agree to abide by the conditions um does the board have any questions of the applicant I have a question to staff, if you don't mind. We've had several applications come in front of the board to transfer square feet of unused signage. Is there a maximum amount of signage that can be transferred? And I'm just asking for general educational purposes. The board is limited so that you can't increase the number of signage, which ultimately puts a cap on the amount of square footage that can be transferred by the amount of square footage that is totally allowed. So who gets a transfer to whom? I mean, is it like tobacco allotments where you can transfer to anybody for any amount that you've got? Within the property, we can transfer from one sign to another. So it has to be on the particular piece of property. It's just location and size that you're transferring. Right. Okay. Fair enough. And I have a follow-up question to that. If it's the same property, and I think this came into play on this property, is if there's out parcels sold, how does the signage on the out parcels, over out parcels are developed, does that work? Is that? I believe they're treated as separate properties. So they would have their own. Right, they would have their own signage, and the overall development could not borrow signage from those parcels. So once you separate the parcels, you've separated the signage? Right. Yeah, okay. All right. Any other questions? I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move for approval of PLN-BOA-17-0004, the summit, an administrative appeal to transfer 35 square feet of unused signage to allow a primary freestanding sign of 110 square feet and a variance to increase the allowable height of that sign from 10 feet to 12 feet 4 inches, and an administrative appeal to transfer 35 square feet of young youth signage to allow a secondary freestanding sign of 75 square feet in a mixed-use community MU-3 zone at 4100 Nicholasville Road for the reasons provided by staff and subject to the approval of four conditions. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. Do I hear a second? I second. Thank you. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none. Good luck to you. Thank you. Thank you. Application granted. The next is – The next on the agenda is 17-180 Hunt as the applicant present. please come forward tell us your name my name is eddie hunt mr hunt welcome is uh have you read the staff report i have and do you agree to abide by the two conditions i do i will open it up to the board if the board has any questions about this application I do. I don't know. I guess I address it to staff. It's about the second condition where it's removing the condition that new owners come before the board for the second kitchen. Mr. Hunt has asked that we remove that condition. Correct. And I'm wondering, by removing that condition for future buyers, my understanding is the staff or the Board of Inspections wants to limit second kitchens and would like to have some oversight over that because there's fear that you're opening up the residential zone to rentals. So by removing the condition of having future owners come before the board to tell us what their use of their second kitchen is, I just wonder if we're implying that second kitchens are okay. That's my concern about removing the condition that a new buyer come before this board and ask for, to explain what the use of the second kitchen is going to be. It's kind of difficult to explain, but I'll give it my best shot. The concern is not about the second kitchen. Second kitchens have been historically used as an indicator of the potential for a property to have another dwelling unit, which is a no-no. The concern is the establishment of another dwelling unit. Unfortunately, second kitchens have been targeted as what the focus should be on, and we're trying to get away from that and focus on what the real possible issue is, is the rental of it as a second dwelling unit. In this particular setting, there's really not a concern about that. In a lot of parts of Lexington, that concern is basically pretty unfounded. So we're going to get back to a more realistic approach to this. It's just a lot of work, and Mr. Hunt can testify to this, to go through this process. I mean, you all don't see that end of it. In our opinion, it's just an unnecessary step to have to take for a new property owner. Mr. Hunt was very gracious in communicating this restriction to, I guess, everybody, including staff. It could have been easily something that he just ignored. so to his credit he did not do that so i like uh thank you mr marks i i like that explanation that's a good one and uh as far as far as extemporaneous explanations that explains a lot to me because i had uh i had the same concern as ms meyer and i'm glad to hear it explained so thank you any other questions by the board i'll entertain a motion I make a motion we approve PLNBOA-17-1 Eddie Hunt's administrative appeal to allow continued use of a previously authorized second kitchen in a single family residence with new owners, and to amend the previously imposed conditions so that future owners could retain the second kitchen without further appeals in a single family residential R-1D zone at 3965 Fourseth Drive. based on staff's reasons and subject to the two conditions. Thank you, Mr. Needham. You have any second? Second. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye as well. Application passes. Good luck to you. Thank you. Okay. I'm going to take up Total Grace Baptist Church 17-7. Is the applicant present? Come forward, if you would, and tell us your name. My name is Sherrod Ledet. Sorry? Sherrod Ledet. Mr. Ledet? Yes, sir. we have we have two concerns about this particular application i think we had one one or two people in opposition to it first of all is that correct we had one person in opposition okay and uh and the other the other matter that's that i want to take precedence is a recommendation or at least a concern by staff, it is a recommendation, for postponement by staff. So I guess I'd like to hear from staff on this. So Mr. Ledet, if you don't mind taking a seat nearby, don't go too far, and we're going to hear from staff about why this should be postponed. Thank you. We've also received an email. We just got handed an email from, looks like a neighbor, who has some concerns as well from Mr. Paul Newton. Is Mr. Paul Newton in the audience? Okay, we're going to – staff, if you can address the issue of why this ought to be postponed, we'd appreciate it. Our primary concerns are with the site plan as submitted at this time. It just seems like there were several things that need to be addressed, including landscape buffers, which are not shown at all in the plan and could require a request for variances, as well as the paving as shown would require a couple of variances for front yard setbacks. So we think that we just kind of need to postpone this one and take another look at it with a new site plan. And I'm sympathetic to that recommendation to postpone this. Does anybody on the board have questions of staff about their reasons for wanting to postpone? I'd be in favor of that as well. Well, in that case, before we hear from the applicant and the opposition, I think a motion to postpone can be entertained. So I will entertain a motion to postpone if there is one. I move that we postpone PLN-BOA-17-7 Total Grace Church's request for a conditional use permit to expand the existing church and parking in a planned neighborhood residential single family residential R-3 slash R-1C zones at 1217, I'm sorry, 1217, 1313, and 1317 North Limestone and 100 Withers. Avenue. And the reason for the You want me to give the reasons for it? Just for the reasons. For the reasons stated by staff. Okay. Do I hear a second? Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye as well. Now what we've done is we've postponed this for I didn't hear a time period on the motion. We need a time period, don't we? What's your- Till next month. Is that agreeable with the second? Is that agreeable with the board? Did the staff feel that you can address these issues in 30 days, and does the applicant feel like they could do that? I think it's up to the applicant. Well, here's my suggestion. I suggest that we postpone this for 30 days if it comes back in a form that's acceptable to staff to be heard. We'll put it on the agenda, give the proper notice, and everybody will know it. Is that fair? Yes. Okay. Is that fair? That's the way I've interpreted the motion, the second, and the way that it carried by the board. Is that a fair interpretation? Okay. We'll see you next month. Thank you. Mr. Ledet, yes, sir. Did you understand what we were doing? Yes, sir, I understood. And it's not that we don't agree. We just wanted more clarity, maybe, just on exactly. Because we understand that you're asking for more information as far as what the design looks like. Our understanding when we went for the applicant wasn't that you just needed a proposed drawing, not the actual details and all those different things. We have our engineer actually working on that, so meeting that deadline of 30 days I don't think will be an issue. But we would like to be so when we do come back in 30 days, that there's not really, we don't have this type of conversation again to where it's very clear on what type of landscape and different things that you're looking for. I'll be happy to set up a meeting with you. I think you have my contact information, and we can do that and go over that. But I think that the engineer drawing will be, you know, really helpful. Okay. Do you have a copy of the staff report? I do, and I've read over it. Yes, sir. The staff report has four particular things that they set out, and that should be guidelines for you in your discussion with staff about how to satisfy them so they can make a recommendation for approval. We give great deference to staff recommendations, and as you can tell by this motion, because we've agreed to postpone it for 30 days. So in your meeting, those four things and whatever else staff wants to take up should be the things that you're concerned with. I'd also recommend that you talk with the gentleman here, the lady and gentleman here that came to speak on this application and get their contact information so that you can talk with them so maybe next time you show up you won't have any opposition or anybody opposed to your application. And then you, I'm sorry, so there was another, because you said you had an email? Yes, and I'll give you this. This is an email that staff received from Mr. Paul Newton. You can have this copy. Come up and get it. If you like, sure, come up and get it. That may be the only copy we have at this point. Well, in that case, let me give it back to staff, and when you meet with them, they will give you a copy, or they can give you a copy beforehand. Yes, sir. Maybe you can make copies for Mr. Ledet and the person here in opposition. so before you leave the building today maybe you can get a copy maybe you can get staff to make you a copy of that fair enough? yes sir, thank you good luck to you, we'll see you next month the next item on the agenda is 17-2 YMCA of Central Kentucky if they're present. Is the YMCA present? We left a phone message with them, but that's all I can tell you. Well, if they're not here, my recommendation is I hate to take up a matter where the applicant is not present. And so we're going to postpone this for 30 days. and if staff wouldn't mind attempting to get in contact with them and see what their preference is, and we may or may not hear. I don't want to just deny the application, but we'll hear from them. If they want to be on the agenda next month, staff will let us know. Thank you. The next item is 17-3, Duke Road Personal Care. Is the applicant present? Yes. Mr. Solomon, come up. And you had opposition. Were you all able to work out anything? Yes, Solly Van Meter for Duke Road Personal Care, LLC. And there were- I'm sorry, Mr. Van Meter, I called you Mr. Solomon. I know better and you do too. I answered that. The folks that are the neighbors to the south of the subject property did appear today and we did meet outside and I'll let them speak for themselves. Okay, and so has the opposition withdrawn, have you withdrawn your opposition? No, I think we still- Come up if you don't mind and Mr. Van Meter, have a seat and we'll hear from, tell us your name please. My name is Leah Bachmeier-Killy. I'm the daughter of Bonnie Bachmeier and the niece of Roy Bachmeier, who are co-owners of 331 Duke Road, which is directly right to 327 Duke Road. We just have some general concerns as the property owners. We worry about the possibility of the timeline and the construction disrupting our tenants. We do have five one-bedroom apartments directly next door to where they're planning on taking down 327 Duke Road. So we worry about the timeline and the disruption to our tenants. And then we just have a few general concerns about if that will change the character of the neighborhood or the expectations of our tenants. Well, and of course the character of the neighborhood is one of the concerns, one of the reasons why the board exists, is to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood. The staff has recommended approval of this application. And is there anything else that you'd like to say about that beyond what you've said? Because what I want to do is hear from you and then hear from staff and then we'll hear from the applicant. Okay. I mean, just the last concern we would have is we're not really sure what kind of impact it could have on our property value. We're situated directly next to Windstream, and then there was 327 Duke Road, which is currently a four-plex apartments, and across the street are all apartment buildings. So we just don't know if that would, being directly next to a care facility would detract from our property value. We're just not sure of what impact it could have. Well, you're aware that it is now a personal care facility? Yes, one over. We have 327X as a buffer building between our building. So you're the neighbor right next to the new facility, the expanded facility. Yes, currently next door is a four-plex apartment building. Yes, okay. And that's going to make you immediate neighbors to this applicant. I got you. Yeah, that's a good picture. Let's, well, thank you, Ms. Bachmeier. Let me hear from staff about this, because I have a couple of questions of staff as well. And, of course, being a lawyer, my questions are all technical questions and usually have some relation to the substance of the application. but for the most part they're they help me my questions try to help me understand what the application is and what the uh what the context of the application so you all are gonna looks like put up a picture Is that right? There's the mobile microphone up here if you want to use that. Sure. Yeah. these two properties are located at 319 and 327 duke road which is in chevy chase generally between providence road which is this street right here and cooper drive which is down in this area this property right here is the subject property and then this is the this was the original approval, this is the original rest home, and then this is where they hope to expand to. This is the apartment building that the lady who was opposed to this was referring to. Did you have specific questions? Well, just for context, the subject property itself currently is identified as personal care facility. I couldn't find a definition of personal care facility. We don't have one and that's why it says in the staff report that it provides the same services as an assisted living but it's kind of a level above assisted living. It's not the same as a skilled nursing facility but they do have somebody that will administer medicines. There's a registered nurse I believe and somebody that will administer medicines unlike an assisted living facility where they do not do that. And it doesn't need a certificate of need as a skilled nursing facility does. So it's kind of between assisted living and skilled nursing, and we don't have a definition for it in the zoning ordinance specifically. We have assisted living that we define and we have a nursing home that we define, but we don't specifically have a definition. Yeah, and that would, Mr. Van Meter, I. Sure, yeah, just for definitional purposes, I am curious, because I looked and couldn't find what, I wasn't satisfied with what I found. So what do you think? Right. The zoning ordinance actually does not have personal care as a category. Personal care does require a certificate of need from the state. It's a state licensure level. Like skilled nursing, it requires a certificate of need to operate. Everything else as characterized is correct. It's for a level of acuity above assisted living but below skilled nursing. It's where frail people can live, but maybe they aren't in need of skilled nursing care, but they are more frail than folks that might live in assisted living. And so you already have a certificate of need? A certificate of need has existed for this facility since the 50s. Since the 50s, okay. Well, thank you. That helps. Thank you, Mr. Van Meter. Go ahead. Okay. Did you have any specific questions other than that, or did you just want to? Well, that was my specific question. I'm not sure that staff can answer the question of the person in opposition or the fact that she had questions. I don't know whether staff can say how this will affect property values or whether construction will. The construction would probably disrupt anybody in the neighborhood. Sure, it would be. Because it will take a while to do, and they're going to have traffic in and out. But as far as property values, it's been a personal care facility since the 50s, and the property values have not gone down in Chevy Chase. I mean, it has the ND1 overlay on it, and so that helps to guarantee that the construction will be in line with the Chevy Chase neighborhood. Okay. And I noticed that this was planned as a one-story structure. Correct. And the one you approved in August was one-story and two-story. And this one is just spread out more, has more square footage, and it's all one-story. All one-story. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Van Meter. I don't know whether you can answer any of the questions that were raised, any of the concerns that were raised. I tried to out in the hall, and I will try to now. The construction timeline, I explained to them, to the neighbors, these folks, what we currently expect. It is construction, and there are things that happen in construction. But currently, it is our expectation that construction would start in early June. would take about nine months to get finished and we should be open for business in about a year from now there are this facility will have two additional beds from the current 16 bed facility it's it is a high-end boutique neighborhood focused facility intended to serve aging folks in chevy chase i tried to assure the black myers that the residents of our facility probably will not disturb their tenants our residents tend to not be particularly loud or throw lots of parties and i don't i don't i don't know what else to say about the construction construction does take When it happens, it happens, and it does have some disruptive effect. But we have a lot of space in the back of the property and the property should allow for most of disturbance to be contained on the property itself. Thank you. Does any board member have any questions of Mr. Van Meter? Sully, how are you doing? Cuz we saw you, what was it, maybe a year ago or not quite, six, eight months ago? A few months ago. A few months ago regarding this. And I think that was, did that occupy both parcels at that point? It did not. We initially tried to do the project on the one piece of property. The problem we have is that without onsite parking, we have a nonconforming use. So anything we do to fix the, to change our facility is going to require us to add the required parking. And the challenge was figuring out how to put that in the back of the property. And it requires- It's kind of a wooded area that's completely unused at the moment. Correct. Okay. And it's difficult. You can't build across it because there's a utility easement that goes down the middle of it. But you can access parking back there. that lot is narrow and it required us to build it as a two-story addition we were also at the time trying to figure out a way to salvage uh to retain the front part of the building and just add new resident rooms on the back but it just it ended up being a burdensome i mean a project that financially didn't work because of the small size of the facility and the fixed costs involved with elevators and fire stairs and those sorts of things because it seemed you know you're You're going from 16, I couldn't figure out if the residents and the rooms were the same. I guess there's currently 16 rooms? Correct. And you're building a facility that's going to be just two more rooms? Two more rooms, but they'll be much larger. In each room, it's just two more. Two more residents. The rooms will be significantly larger than, almost three times as large as the rooms that are there now. Those rooms were built, as I say, in the early 50s. They were designed, it was built with funding from a trust for poor women to live. And it's, you know, the market is not there for that size rooms particularly anymore. You mentioned high-end boutique hotel. So this is basically an upscaling. It's for the neighborhood. It's for the folks that live in this particular neighborhood. Any other questions to the applicant? I have one more. I couldn't tell the depth of, and maybe it says it on this map, but as we see where the buildings currently exist, where will the front of this building currently sit? Is it in line with the neighbors, or are we pushed to the front? I wasn't able to determine that based on what I saw. It is in line with the, the setback is in line, I believe, with the neighbor to the north. I'm not sure exactly how it got established, whether it's by deed or what, but the current building. How did he get that? The current building is forward of the properties to the south and in line with the property to the north. And it'll be the same as where the current building exists on 1217. Correct. 327. Yeah, no. 319. 319. 319, right. That's where it'll sit in front of that. Yes. And that looks like a 50-foot setback from the street. Is that right? It is. Okay. The way it read, it looked as if it was being pushed way up. that's probably what next to behind that's what 10 feet behind where the neighbor sits to the south i don't know it's it's whatever we're allowed to do it's that's by um i did do a version of it that's superimposed on the aerial photograph if that'd be helpful because the wind stream building looks really far out Would you like to see this? Yeah, sure. You got another map? We have this. That's up there. Same thing, but on the aerial photo. Yeah, let us take a look at that, just to. Yeah, sure. That's the same that we're looking at. Just the drawing. That's just a. If the board members that are speaking could make sure their mics are on, that'll help. Thank you. While we're looking at this, I've got a question about the screening. It's on condition that it will be screened. And maybe it would be helpful if the lady who could express concerns about how it's going to affect her property, if she knew what the screening was going to be. So what's the screening and the separation going to be? We haven't developed our landscaping plan yet. We will comply with the ordinance. So what does the ordinance require? Between this property, or the 319 property, and the property next door, they're both zoned the same, and so it doesn't require specific screening. It requires it around the parking area, but not along the property line. But between the B1 zone and the R3 zone, it's a 15 foot landscape buffer, unless they put up a six foot privacy fence, and then it's five feet. It can be five feet. But I would say chances are they'll be responsible enough to put landscaping to do some screening along the property line. Because that's going to be, I think that side of the property is going to be where the dementia area is. We don't have a dementia area, but a lot of those are. But it's going to be fenced on that side, I believe. And then I would say chances are there will be screening. Barbara, so the driveway is removed in between the two? Yeah. So it looks like in the picture it's about the same distance that it currently is. Yes, it looks like it. Same distance from where the apartment building currently sits, yeah. Okay. Any other questions of the applicant or to staff? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. I move that we approve PLN-BOA-17-3 Duke Road Personal Care LLC's request of a conditional use permit to modify and expand a rest home and a planned neighborhood residential neighborhood design overlay R-3-ND1 zones at 319 and 327 Duke Road based on the staff's recommendations and subject to the five conditions outlined by staff. Thank you, Mr. Needham. Do I hear a second? Second. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, good luck with your project. Mr. Chair, I would like to refer to the Planning Commission that perhaps a definition for a personal care facility be determined and included in the proper zoning. I think that's a good idea. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. I don't know who would do that. Tracy, you got an opinion? or Jim? Well, if you want, are you asking to refer to the Planning Commission or to the Division of Planning? There's two different ways that we can do that. But either way, I mean, probably the staff would try to address something and present it to the Planning Commission. I would imagine it would be staff. Okay. Okay. But would it not have to be approved by the planning commission to go into? It will, what would happen if, either way, if you refer it to the planning commission, then they would still get information from the staff. If it goes to the staff, then the staff would bring it to the planning commission, and then they would have to act on it and make some kind of recommendation. that recommendation would go forward to the full council for them to put it in the zoning ordinance. So it sounds like it would be easier perhaps to rephrase that and refer it to staff. That would be my thought. I don't know if Jim may have a weigh-in on that. That's fine. It's probably not the kind of thing that will do a special text amendment just for that. So when the time is right, include that with a package of other maybe related changes, if that's acceptable to you all. I think that's a good idea. Like I say, I had my really problem with this last application was I was looking for definitions that I couldn't find. So the whole thing seemed kind of fuzzy. So I think that would be helpful. Thank you, Ms. Whitman. We hear this terminology quite a bit. So I think it needs to be defined. I agree. Those are all of the matters on the agenda. There was one matter that Mr. Marks sent to us about from the conditional use review team recommending zoning ordinance revisions. And in effect, what I understand, Jim, is basically, since a lot of our applications have become routine, like churches, for example, that in particular zones you want to include within the principal permitted use additional definitions or additional uses so they won't have to come before the board because those applications have become routine. Is that a good summary? I'd just add a little bit that it's more of a routinely come to the board and there are no issues. Right. That's the key part. They routinely come to the board and there's very rarely any issues of concern to staff or to neighbors that get noticed. So that category we felt would be eligible for making the whole process much simpler and changing it either to principal permitted use or accessory use. There are routine applications. You mentioned churches that do raise issues fairly frequently, churches in residential zones in particular, whether it's traffic or buffering or open space, those kind of things. So it's not just that they're routine, but more that they routinely come to the board with no issues. Any questions from the board about the conditional use review team's recommendations? Ms. Meyer, it looks like you've got some things. I do. The plant nurseries with no on-site sales, is that a wholesale? Would that be a wholesale? No, that would not even be wholesale. Okay. No sales at all. No sales at all. So it's just a plant nursery where they're growing plants. Just- And they distribute them on their own to where they need to go. Just to grow plants? Well, that's what a nursery does. But I mean- The other part of this is that that particular use is probably an agricultural use in and of itself that's exempt. To some extent, we're just clarifying that, but we do think if there are sales on site, whether wholesale or retail, that it still needs to be a conditional use. Okay. Okay. And my other question, I have an old, I didn't get a chance to look up in the zoning ordinance, a columbarium and a mausoleum. What are the definitions of a columbarium and a mausoleum? i'm looking at the r1a through r5 zones i'm going to give you very general okay columbarium is where ashes are stored it's fairly commonly something you see at a church we got into some awkward situations with some churches where they wanted to add a columbarium and we said well you're going to have to go through the conditional use process and you know it's again all of a sudden you don't hear from them again. So I hate to put people in that kind of position where they are kind of forced to maybe go ahead and do something without going through all the right channels. But a mausoleum is where the bodies are stored rather than if somebody can on staff. I don't know, Barb, if you have any more details about that or not. Okay. I can't tell you that's one of those categories that we hardly ever see those requests. It's very uncommon. I can't think of any in the years that I've been involved in this. So that's maybe not one where we've had a history of a lot where it's no issues kind of thing, but more it's just extremely rare and more of a clean up kind of. If there's concern about that, like I said, we hardly ever see those. That would be easy to, if it's raising issues, not to include that as part of the package. Chairman, is your microphone on? Sorry. Thank you. Yeah, I had some concern about the mausoleum myself, simply because a mausoleum is more like a cemetery, and that's where the remains are stored. But columbariums where ashes are stored, to me, is perhaps a difference more in degree than in substance. But it still is a difference. And so I can see why columbariums may not have to go through the same process as a mausoleum would go through. Hopefully I've explained my thoughts. so if we could leave columbarium's intake mausoleums out of this proposal that would probably make us feel better. I agree. You agree? I agree. We're happy to do that. Okay. Any other concerns by the board to this suggested list? Any other? No. No? No. Do we need a motion on this, or do you just? No, I don't think so. This was just an opportunity for us to raise concerns if we had any. Okay, thank you. Is there anything else to come before the Board of Adjustment for February? Our representative for the YMCA has arrived. If you guys want to take another look at that. I'm sorry, the YMCA? Yes, the YMCA applicant is here. Yes. Okay, are you here? Come up. We might need some help from Tracy about how to address this since it's already been postponed. You're probably going to have to rescind your motion to postpone if you're going to hear it. Yeah, that's right. Let me get to it first. Here we go. Tell me your name, please. Yes, I'm Charlie Schneider with Brandstetter Carroll here on behalf of the YMCA. Shiner, is that right? Charlie Schneider. Schneider. Yes. Mr. Schneider, we missed you earlier. My apologies. And what we did was to postpone it to next month. There was nobody here in opposition that I recall, and so we can do one of two things. We can either hear you next month, or we can, if the board so desires, we can rescind our motion to postpone it and hear you today. So what's the board's pleasure? Let's rescind the motion. Okay. Thank you. Do we need a motion to rescind? I make a motion we rescind. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Motion to rescind 17-2 YMCA. Motion made and seconded. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. We'll hear you today. Mr. Schneider, welcome. This is your application. Have you read the staff report? I have not well one of the things that you should know is that there are four conditions to the to the staff's recommendation of approval and I'll be glad to read them to you if you like can we give him a copy do we have an extra copy let's give you a copy If they're on the agenda, we can get the agenda. Here's the next review. It's going to, and I'm going to read them to you anyway because it's going to take the same time for you to read them as me to read them out loud. Number one, the parking lot expansion shall comply with the submitted site plan and the existing development plan shall be amended, subject to approval by a Division of Planning or Planning Commission as appropriate. Number two, all necessary permits shall be obtained from the Division of Building Inspection prior to paving, with the new parking areas to be landscaped for Article 18 of the Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, a certificate of occupancy will be required prior to use of the new parking area. Number three, final design of the new parking areas and drive aisles shall be subject to review and approval by the Division of Traffic Engineering. Number four, a stormwater management plan should be provided in accordance with the requirements of the adopted engineering manuals subject to acceptance by Division of Engineering. So those are the four conditions. If we approve your application, those will be part of the approval. Do you agree to abide by those conditions? We do, yes. Okay. Any questions by the Board to the applicant? I have a question. And where are the offices located in that? Is that the, I don't have a map in front of me, I can't get the documents here. So it's on the north side, would that be correct? The offices would actually be on the southeast side of the building. So if you were driving in and approaching the building, they would be on the left, on the front. On the left? Yes, they had access from that front left corner. There is already an existing door there that will be accessed through. So when you walk into the building, on the left is the offices, not so much down the hallway on the right. Correct. It would be on the left. And it would be supply those offices on the left. Yes. And what is this coming around? That is to extend the drive around the back so that they can access the parking from the right side of the building. There would be no access on the left side of the parking lot. Okay. What is in between the parking lot? What's in between the parking lot on the left and the parking lot that you're proposing to build? The existing parking lot on the front of the building? Yes. It's just grass. It's just grass. Yes. So it goes behind. It's hard to tell on these maps. It goes, I see, in front of the basketball courts, behind the, is there a? You all have the map of the application. Let's put that up on the screen, if you don't mind, so we'll all know what we're talking about. There's a covered patio. I'm trying to get my bearings on where that is. covered patio? yes not sure where that covered patio is located we're going to put the drawing up on the screen here in just a moment and for our purposes right now zoom in a little bit if you can so us older people can see it more clearly. The reason I'm asking the question is it seems like the access, it just seems easier on the left from the existing parking lot that is in the front of the building as opposed to on the right. But I thought there was, where that line comes through, I thought there was a covered patio there where they had picnic tables. So that area is actually to the right on the screen. It would be at the upper part of the right-hand parking lot. There's a covered pavilion that is a freestanding building. So they would actually be driving between the pavilion and the YMCA to get back to that rear drive. Okay. And what does that dotted line represent? I'm confused. I'm not sure. Is that the? The heavy dotted line is just the area that would be as part of this construction project. So it's an area of disturbance, more or less. Okay, and the shaded area is the new proposed parking. Correct. And also the non-shaded area just to the south of that where you see the three square dots, that's an existing concrete paved area that they had not utilized. It was to be an outdoor patio space, but it's just never been utilized. So they were going to pave in the planter areas that do not have trees in them and go ahead and extend the parking lot down into that area. Okay. How many parking spaces is that going to give you? I believe it was 22. 22 new spaces. Spaces, yes. Okay. Well, the staff report says a total of 28 new spaces. Is that right? Yes. Okay. Okay. Any other questions from the board? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. I move that we approve PLN-BOA-17 to YMCA of Central Kentucky's request for a conditional use permit to convert existing multipurpose rooms into offices and expand the existing parking lot in a light industrial I-1 zone at 381 West Loudoun Ave, based on the reasons by staff and subject to the following four conditions. Thank you, Mr. Needham. We'll hear a second. Second. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? The motion carries. Good luck with your project. Thank you very much. Now, are there any other matters to come before the Board of Adjustment? If they're not, we stand. I'm sorry. Yes, ma'am. Yes, I had contacted the Division of Planning. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. Sorry, I thought that had been relayed. That's quite all right. Tell us your name, please. My name is Dr. Lisa Gonneau, 7525 Old Richmond Road. and I'm here because I appeared before the Board of Adjustment each month between October 2015 and January 2016. I've requested a revocation hearing for the property at 7524 Old Richmond Road numerous times in person as well as through written correspondence. I have included those copies. I've also submitted letters of support from my neighborhood association and Councilman Maloney at past meetings. Those are also in the packet. I'm here today because I feel that I've complied with the necessary requirement to seek revocation. KRS 100.237, Section 4, clearly states that if a landowner does not come into compliance with the conditions of the conditional use permit, the notice of the time and place for the revocation hearing can be given to the landowner at least one week prior to the hearing. Another year has passed without any changes to the property and without the conditions being met for over 10 years. As required by KRS 100.237, Section 3, the conditional use permit was not exercised within the one-year time limit set by the law and should be revoked since the building was not completed and the specific use to grow sod was never exercised. I would also like to see the building removed. At the January 2016 meeting, Craig Music with the Micah Group and I, we stood here and we took an oath to be truthful in our testimony. I've included that email from Mr. Music from December 11th, listing all the actions supposedly being taken by the landowner. At the January meeting, he again stated many things that were moving forward on the property. The damaged panels on the greenhouse were not replaced as stated, and the District 7 Office and the Kentucky State Transportation Office of Legal Services confirmed that there hasn't been a new encroachment permit from December 2015 to now, and I've also included those emails in the packet. The property looks the same, except for being even more run down, and nothing has been done. This property went up for sale on July 7th. I contacted the Division of Planning and others that same day with concerns over how this was being advertised for a possible use as a showroom or equipment storage. I never received a response to that email, and that email is also in your packet. From October 2016 to January 2017, I tried to work with code enforcement with assistance from Vice Mayor Kay as I was told at the January 2016 meeting that this was a code enforcement issue. The property owner was only cited for not mowing and overgrowth. They wouldn't even take action on the abandoned signs, and I've included all those emails in the packet as well. Today I'm submitting letters for a revocation hearing from Council Member Plowman, from Walt Gaffield, the president of the Fayette County Neighborhood Council, and from my next-door neighbors, Wayne and Marsha Mitchell, that live diagonally from the greenhouse, who have also been affected by this property and this decision. I've also spoken with Carla Crager, who lived in my home in 2006 when this came before the Board of Adjustment, and she has told me that problems existed from the beginning of this project and that she and her husband felt that they had no choice but agreeing to this project in 2006 and that assurances were made to them that things would be done correctly. I've also included a chronology of events to date. I've also spoken with an engineer who has also had his own greenhouse for 10 years. He knows a lot about the structures of greenhouses, and I would consider him to be an expert. He's told me that the panels have a 15-year light transmission life. The useful life as a greenhouse is pretty short. A greenhouse is a very light structure that depends on its overall structure to maintain the integrity of the overall structure. However, damage like loss of a panel or holes in the panels, which has happened, can reduce the overall integrity a lot. The panels are very light, so if they start coming loose, they'll blow all over the neighborhood, even in a light wind. When the panels for the subject greenhouse were delivered, there was a thunderstorm that blew them into the trees and power lines in my vicinity. The ventilation and heating equipment in the structure is very subject to failure from lack of use and maintenance. I wouldn't buy it even for pennies because of its history. So this equipment is just a menace to the neighborhood should vandals or children get into the structure. I think the bottom line is that this structure serves no useful purpose, future purpose, at this stage of life. The subject greenhouse is not far from catastrophic failure, natural or man-made, that will result in failure of the entire structure. There's no legitimate excuse for leaving this structure in place because it's not likely useful for its original purpose, and repurposing it is just dangerous from a structural point of view, and that's what this engineer told me. I've heard a lot over the last months that I've been here about following the process and due process. the owner of the greenhouse property and his representatives have not acted in good faith. He's been provided multiple opportunities to comply with the conditions. This is a Board of Adjustment issue. You have the power to schedule this revocation hearing and to do something about this issue once and for all. I followed the correct procedure by bringing this issue of noncompliance to you and asking you to schedule a revocation hearing. This conditional use permit was specifically for growing sod, and that was the permitted use, and I believe that was very clear. A commercial greenhouse can only be allowed in the AR zone with a conditional use permit. And to note, it's not one of the two principal permitted uses in the AR zone. It's not on five or more acres, so it doesn't meet the local, state, or federal definition for a farm that has to be on five acres and show an agricultural use. Before this property is sold, and this issue becomes even more complex by a new owner not realizing what can and can't be done on this property, I implore you to do something. There's been a lot of talk about the building being empty now, making it impossible to do anything about it, But from what I read in black and white in the zoning ordinance, it says that if the conditions aren't met, that it should be reported and a hearing scheduled in a reasonable time. Please honor this request for a revocation hearing to be scheduled, and I would like all my documents to be entered into the record. Thank you for your time. I have Council Member Plowman here. I don't know if she wishes to make a statement also. Dr. Gonneau, is that right? Yes. Do you have a copy of your written statement with you that you could submit to the board? You're reading from it. Well, it is just my scribbled handwriting on paper, so I would be happy to type it and submit it. You're certainly welcome to do that. I do recall this particular piece of property coming up several months ago with a similar request, and two members of the board, including me, had to recuse from entertaining whatever motions were being made with respect to this particular piece of property. And if I recuse, and I'll have to recuse today because that's consistent with what I did before, we lose a quorum for the Board of Adjustment this month. So unfortunately, we can't entertain your request this month, and it will be up to perhaps future boards to determine whether they want to take this up or not. But thank you for coming. May I ask a question about that? Sure. So this has happened several times now, as you mentioned, where actually two members have recused themselves, and there have not been enough people to make a vote on this. So maybe this is directed more towards Ms. Jones. If this is the process and this continues to happen, what other options do I have here? Well, let me speak to one portion of that. The fact that two of us recused from the full board when it was presented before, we did not lose a quorum at that time because we had a full board in front of us. So it could have been, and I don't recall what happened to it before because when I recused, I left the room and didn't hear all the discussion. It's in the chronology I've provided. So thank you for the package, but I don't know. If you want to answer the question, Tracy, you certainly can. Well, I think there's a difference in not being able to act because you don't have a quorum and the board choosing not to act. I think in the past that's been what's taken place because of various reasons relating to this and its zoning and the fact that there is no active use going on there right now. But that being said, I mean, the rules are the rules. if a quorum is four and you have a recusal and you only have three, there's no way for this board to take an action of any kind today. The reason today is we would lose a quorum if we were to entertain any action, and therefore we can't take any action this month. So I'm sorry that we can't. Yeah, that has happened once before also. Well, it certainly happened today, and there's nothing that I can do about that. I'm sorry. I understand. Thanks for coming and presenting the materials to us. Ms. Plowman, do you want to say something to us? Thank you. I just wanted to share my support. Obviously, I've only been on council the past four months, but having spent time with Dr. Gonneau and looking at all the steps from A to Z and all the time and energy that she has put into this, I would ask for your consideration at a future meeting to go ahead and have the hearing. Thank you. Thank you. There being nothing further to come before the board, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. I make a motion. We adjourn. Second. I hear a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. We are adjourned. Thank you, everybody. Thank you.