Music Thank you. We'll be right back. Welcome, everybody, to the August 25th meeting of the Board of Adjustment. We've got a long agenda. We've got a long way to go and a short time to get there. I've got to be out of here by 7. I hope we're not anywhere close to that. The first thing I want to do is to recognize a former member of the Board of Adjustment. Larry Forrester, would you come forward? I'm going to come down there with you. We'll watch. My kids are here to meet. How's that? Good. Okay. Larry, Larry Forrester, on behalf of your meritorious service for what, three years, three and a half years? Three and a half years. Three and a half years, we present you with this little memento of your service and our appreciation. Thanks. And congratulations on your promotion. So good luck to you. Thanks, sir. And Jan's going to take a picture of both of us. All right. Okay. Okay, gotcha. And Larry, good luck to you in the future. Don't make any bad decisions. All right. Okay. We've got several things to do. First of all, if you've got a cell phone or other device on you, please silence it, turn it off, turn it so we can't hear it, either sound or vibration, and that'll help us get through this. and before we dig into the docket let me ask if there's anybody here who intends to testify in any of the cases that are on the agenda today if you would stand and raise your right hand do you solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth Thank you. You may be seated. I'll ask the staff if there are any withdrawals. First of all, any withdrawals. PLN BOA 17-0047, James Mitchell, the last case on the agenda, has withdrawn their application via email. Okay. Is anybody here on behalf of this administrative review, BOA 17-47, if you're nobody's here everybody got the word that it's withdrawn if so congratulations you don't have to stay till the end of the docket i'm going to run through the docket or the the agenda and if there are if the applicant is present raise your hand if there's anyone in opposition i'll ask you that as a second question and then we will take the unopposed applications first and we'll take the opposed second. Before I get farther, are there any postponements or requests for postponements? I see one hand go up. Yes, sir. Please come forward and tell us your name and your business. My name is Jeff Graves. I'm the PLN-BOA-1700046 on a variance. and you're you're going to be first on the docket i think mr graves uh are you what do you i'd like to postpone it to the next meeting oh you want to postpone it i uh i know the staff uh has uh an opinion that they would like to get this heard today do you have any reason for requesting a post i don't have all my information here i talked to them earlier and they said i could postpone it so i didn't bring anything with me today and i also talked to the legal counsel uh this morning and I want to gather everything up and have – I need more photographs of the back of my property and things like that, which I don't have. I know the staff was opposed. The staff, do you want to weigh in on the request for postponement? We are prepared to present today. I think there are several people here who may be in opposition. You might consider whether or not they would be able to return. Is anyone here in opposition to PLN 17-46, Jeff Graves? I see one at least. Two, three. What's the pleasure of the board? We've got a request for postponement. Is anybody opposed to the request for postponement? Of those who raised your hands, I see hands that are opposed to it. So we've got an actual controversy, so I'll hear from the board. What's your pleasure? So your reason is that you don't have photographs? Right. I don't have anything organized. I was told if I come today I could get a postponement and that I would need to appear to get the postponement because it said the information I got, I would get a postponement if I wasn't here. But they told me if I was here that I could request it, otherwise I may not get a postponement. So I didn't bring anything. I was counting on that postponement. And after talking to legal advice this morning, I only got my information from the city last night. And I stayed up all night until 4 in the morning working on stuff. And I'm just not prepared. They want pictures now. There was questions about the back of my property. I don't have photographs of that. I didn't have time to do that this morning. And it's concerning a driveway that is on the side of my property. It's only seven foot some odd feet, and it's not big enough to get vehicles down. They said I should be able to park back there. I want to be able to show that that's impossible. This is all an ADA thing for my mother, who's 89 years old. She's owned this house her whole life. We've been lifelong residents of Lexington on multiple properties. We've never asked for anything from the government. and I just want to get a fair plan and when I got the disapproval recommendations and after talking to people there were just things in there that didn't I don't have the other piece of paper that didn't sound right. I didn't want to appear unprepared or I didn't want to seem like a fool if they're saying something that I can prove is not correct in what they said in their document. and I also wanted time to talk to anyone that's opposed. I don't think people really understand. This is not for, I plan to try to work with the city to make the driveway smaller than 26 feet or 21 feet. And it's only so my mom can get out of her property. There's no other way out right now. It's not for a party house. There's five to ten doctors and nurses that have to visit her every month. They can't get in to our house because there's only place for one car to park. People have gotten tickets. They have to park over on Beaumont, which is a block away and walk over sometimes. It's down in the bottom of a court, which nobody sees it, so there's only one way in and out. There's just a lot of problems there. And I've got photographs of other properties around the city that supposedly are the same thing and redeveloped and whatever. And the PVA shows the property with grass all over it. I go take a picture, it's all blacktop. They got approved. This is for a medical reason. No more than that. I'm just not prepared right now. I was typing up things and working, and after I talked to someone this morning, I thought, I'll get the postponement and then come back and have everything squared away with photographs. I've got about maybe 100 photographs of different properties and things and showing before and after what's happened. And we had a driveway put in, and I thought the gentleman was going to get the permits and everything. It was a big construction company. And I just told him, I said, my mom's disabled. We can't get out of the house. We have to go out in the middle of the night to a doctor or something. We need to be right there at the front to get out. Doctors can't come in. We need at least two spaces side by side, make it big enough for that. Well, he made it bigger than I wasn't aware of the regulations and so forth on it. I would have worked out something ahead of time. But I want to try to modify it, and I'd like to have pictures to show my proposal of what I want to do to modify it and take the driveway down to maybe 15 feet instead of 21. There's no walkway at the front of the house. I want to show that part of that can be used as a walkway because we don't have a walk up to the door. there's just a lot of things to go over and it would probably take me an hour or more to present it after I've got everything here Mr. Chair I've seen a reason why we shouldn't postpone this I mean I think that this gentleman needs the time to do that I'm not saying it's right or wrong I'm just saying I think there's nothing wrong with postponing it at this point and also giving you the 30 days that would allow time for you to work with the city and see how you might be able to come. Yes. No one's been out to the property, and according to this thing here, they're making statements like they had been there and observed things, and they're just looking at it from an old aerial view, and you can't. It's like fighting a war. The troops on the ground can see something. You can't see something from a plane, and if you say, hey, we're against it because we see this picture of the car in the backyard ten years ago. So if we give you a postponement, would you agree to spend the 30 days and work with the city and see what you all can come up with? Sure, yeah, and change it. But I don't need somebody to come out. They just say, give me a picture or whatever. They need to spend the time to come out. My mother, we've lived here our whole life. I was born in this house. She suffered five or six years of elder abuse in two other states, and I brought her back here to be. Okay, all right. so how about if we i'll make a motion to postpone for 30 days is that okay and i can maybe talk to people who are let them know what we're really trying to do i don't think that's clear to a lot of people thank you we've got a motion to postpone is there a second second uh all those in favor say aye aye aye thank you we'll see you in 30 days yes grave we'll thank you on the docket for next month thank you thank you and i'm sorry for those that came in to to hear this but hopefully you'll come back in 30 days and and we'll hear you then the next uh well let's see is there any other um we need to remind you to um approve the minutes from last month okay good fair enough we I don't have a copy of the minutes. I did get them by email and looked at them. Since I'm the chair, did everybody else read the minutes from last month? I'll entertain a motion to approve. I so move. Second. Motion by Mr. Clark, second by Ms. Whitman. To approve the minutes, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed, thank you very much. um okay i'm like i said earlier i'm gonna run through the agenda and we'll see are there any other requests for postponement on the agenda today or withdrawals hearing none uh we just heard from mr graves his uh his matter was postponed for 30 days the next item on the agenda is is 17-55 dean scarvin is mr scarvin present is there anybody in opposition to mr scarvin anybody no opposition mr scarvin will hear you first after we get through the agenda The next on the agenda is 17-56. Jitendra and Nalambin Patel, are the applicants present? You can just raise your hand if you're here. We're not ready to hear you yet. Is there anyone in opposition to 17-56? Hearing none, we will hear you second. Have a seat, and we'll get to you shortly. Thank you. The next item is 17-58 Lester Stutter. Is Mr. Stutter present? Mr. Stutter is present. Is anyone in opposition to 17-58 Lester Stutter? The staff has recommended disapproval. We will hear you, Mr. Stutter, in order. after we've run through the docket as well. 17-59, Dennis Anderson, is Mr. Anderson present? Okay. Is there anyone in opposition to Dennis Anderson investors? 17-59. Okay, we'll get to you on the docket as well. Thank you. The conditional use appeals, 17-57, Bears and Dogs, LLC, is the applicant present? I see they are. Is anyone in opposition to? I see some hands in opposition. So we will hear you at the end of the docket after we've heard all the uncontested applications. Next item on the agenda is 17-51 Macedonia Christian Church. Is the applicant present? I see they are. Anyone in opposition to the Macedonia Christian Church? Seeing none, we'll get to you in short order. Next, 17-52 Floor Cliff Nature Sanctuary is the applicant present. I see that you are. Anyone in opposition to the Floor Cliff application? Seeing none, we'll get to you shortly. Next is 17-53 Board and Brush. Is the applicant present? Applicants are present. Anyone in opposition to Board and Brush? I see none. We'll get to you shortly. Thank you. and James Mitchell has been withdrawn. So the first item on the agenda is Dean Scarvin. Mr. Scarvin, you're present. I understand. Come forward and tell us about your application. Quite simply, just want to put a building up. And the way our property is laid out, we request the variances in order to put the building where it's most practical for our use. Any questions for Mr. Scarvin? Mr. Scarvin, why is it more practical in that location rather than further back? Due to existing propane lines, leach fields for our septic system, the contours of the land itself. The only other place to put it would be so far back it would be impractical for us to run a driveway all the way to the back of the property to park our vehicles. And we cannot get behind the existing garage shed combination, but it's not suitable for routine traffic. we have to be very careful when we do pull behind there and to avoid crossing the septic lines and the propane lines driving over them we would have to go behind this building where there's there's just not room to do so on a regular basis excuse me i'm sorry could you two state your names and address for the record i assume you're a mrs scarvin is that correct who are you who are you my wife sherry scarvin i'm sorry that's that's fine we just need it for the record thank you so much And the address is 4224 Leestown Road, Lexington, Kentucky, 40511. The staff has recommended approval. Is there anything that staff wanted to say in addition? I don't think so. Okay. We've read your report. We've read the case review. Anybody from the board have any questions about this application? Yeah, hi, Dean. How are you? I see Dean at Lowe's a lot. Dean, I think I'm fine with staff's recommendations. I think in a perfect world, we would have liked it back, obviously, behind the plane of the house. But due to your current situation, it's fine with me. Any other questions from the board? Anybody else? I'll entertain a motion. I move that we approve PLN BOA 1755, Dean Scarvin's request for variance to reduce the side yard setback from 25 feet to 5 feet, and the front yard from 100 feet to 65 feet to construct an accessory building. workshop slash garage in the agricultural aerial zone at 4224 Lee's Town Road, based on staff's recommendations and subject to the two conditions outlined by staff. Mr. Chair, we did not verify that Mr. Scarvin agreed to the conditions. Right. I was going to ask him. Mr. Scarvin, have you read the staff case report and the conditions, the two conditions that are in the report? Yes. Do you agree with them? Yes. Okay. We've got a motion. Is there a second? Second. Second from Mr. Clark. All in favor say aye. Aye. Also, your application is approved. Thank you very much. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you. The next. Mr. Chairman. Yes. Sorry. That's all right. The next two in order on the agenda are both for disapproval, so I don't know if you intended to. It's customary to put those towards the end. I guess I'll take more time. Okay. All right. Then we'll move 17-56 and 17-58 to the end of the docket because there's opposition from the staff. Actually, the staff has recommended disapproval. So in keeping with our practices, we will hear those at the end. And therefore, the next item is 17-59, Dennis Anderson. Mr. Anderson, come explain your application to us. We'll see if we have any questions. Good morning. Who are you? My name is John Strom. I represent the applicant, Dennis Anderson, INB 1700. I live at 280 Lincoln Avenue here in Lexington, Kentucky. We are seeking approval for a variance to allow a larger front yard setback from 20 feet to 53 feet at 124 Louis Place. We are happy to receive the staff's recommendation of approval and agree to be bound by the conditions that were included there on. And I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Tell me your name again. John Strom. Strom. Yes. Does the board have any questions for this applicant? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. I move to approve PLNBOA 1759 Dennis Anderson Investors 1700 LLC's request for a variance to increase the allowable front yard setback from 20 feet to 50 feet. 53 feet is that correct for the following reasons for the reasons recommended by staff and subject to the three conditions it's it's 253 feet is that correct staff it's 53 feet okay thank you thank you now mr strom you understand that that the application is is the recommendation and the motion is only to grant the uh setback to 53 feet do you understand that that's correct we've talked to the staff about that we're comfortable with 53 feet i have a motion uh is there a second second second miss whitman all in favor say aye aye aye as well good luck with your project thank you very much. The next case with no opposition is Macedonia. Christian Church 17-51 applicant please come forward. Hello. What's about this additional parking lot? What you got in mind? My name is Russell Sales. I'm the chair of the board at Macedonia Christian Church. Our church was built in 1830, so we've done some conditional use and added a school since then. And growing on that, our congregation has been very blessed. We've grown, and we just need to add about 50 to 55 more parking spots uh i wasn't clear from the application whether the parking lots are going to be connected with each other absolutely they will be yeah currently we're parking in the grass so we kind of have to go off the parking lot and park in the grass we have 17 acres there so we've got plenty of room and uh they'll all connect we do agree to the recommendations of the staff okay I am I didn't get out there to see the site but I googled Earth debt and I saw where there looked like it was a kind of a dirt road that was around the perimeter of the of the existing parking that's where we parked and that's where you're part so this is going to take care of that yes okay thank you the staff had some some questions about an alternate configuration and uh a couple of us wondered if it would be prudent to have the division of traffic engineering sign off on the uh uh the uh application or or at least make it a condition that they get traffic approval Condition number three takes care of that. Oh, sure does. Yeah, I noticed that as well. All right. Any other questions to the applicant from the board? Any comments by staff? Anybody else? I'll entertain a motion. So I move for approval of PLNBOA 17-51, Macedonia Christian Church, requesting a conditional permit to expand the parking lot at an existing church in the AR zone at 3101 Maria Drive and 4551 Winchester Road, based on the recommendation of the council and the conditions set forth. Thank you, Mr. Clark. Any second? Second. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye as well. Good luck with your problem. Thank you very much. The next unopposed application is Floracliff Nature Sanctuary 17-52. Applicants please come forward. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Who are you? I am John Park of 8151 Old Richmond Road here in Lexington. I am the president of the board of directors of the Mary E. Wharton Nature Sanctuary at Floracliff. With me is... I'm Peter Brown, 120 Hamilton Park. Hello. Glad to be here. I'm a brand new board member. This is my 10th day on the board, I think. I'm here for moral support. we recruited him because he has vast experience in the subject area. Yeah, he does have vast experience. Former chairman of this board, he knows the process. Mr. Park, what is a conservation easement, anyway? This tract of land was acquired in part with a fund from the Kentucky Heritage Land Conservation Fund, or a grant, a matching grant, which is the organization, if you get a nature's finest license plate a portion of that fee goes to this fund and as part of that grant process in exchange for the grant money floracliff conveyed a conservation easement to the heritage lane conservation fund which ensures that the property will be managed in accordance with their management principles for conservation of the natural areas and so it is that that easement has been recorded, is of record, and is fully applicable to the entire tract. So no condos, no water slides, that sort of thing. Which? No condos, no water slides, no amusement parks, none of that. No condos or water slides or anything else like that? No, sir. And what are you expanding? We are expanding our existing nature preserve. We've got 360 acres roughly, and it is on Elklick Falls Road in southern Fayette County. Now we've acquired the southern part of the gorge, which is made by Elklick Creek, which is the tributary in Fayette County upriver from Raven Run Creek. And it's in the Kentucky River Palisades area. This new tract of land, as I said, is the southern side of the gorge all the way down to the Kentucky River. It will give us an enhanced ability to protect the preserve from trespassers, poachers, folks who come in and want to dig up ginseng, that sort of thing. It is connected. It's immediately adjacent to our current preserve. We obtained a conditional use permit for that five, ten years ago. We have an existing nature center there on site. It was built about the same time. that's going to be where the primary parking is going to be. There's an existing residence, which used to be a historic Camp Trails End Lodge back starting in the 1920s. It was one of the first girls' outdoor camps in the South. There's a lot of history there. We do intend to continue to use as a residence for an employee as a caretaker, which we think is going to enhance our security. We had a break-in this past month at the Nature Center, which was quite concerning to our staff, and so now we'll have somebody who lives in the residence. The map that was contained with the application, does that show the existing property boundaries, or does this show the new proposed boundaries? I don't have it in front of me, but I believe it shows the existing property boundaries. So the other property is across the interstate from? No, the other property is immediately to the north. It's on the other side of Elk Lake Creek. Okay. And on Elk Lake Creek Road, it's the immediately adjacent property on the north going toward the quarry. Okay. So it's those additional acres that you want to include in the conditional use to extend your existing conservation easement to that additional property. Is that right? Well, the conservation easement is already on the newly acquired property. And the existing property is covered by Articles of Dedication of the State Nature Preserve. So they're both covered by, they're different, but they're both covered by easement that prevent any kind of development. So what do you have a conditional use for at the moment? For the nature sanctuary. For the nature sanctuary. And so you want the same conditional use to apply to the newly acquired property? That is correct. Okay. I know that sounds elementary, but I just want to make sure it's all on the record. Sure. Any questions from staff? I'd just like to make a comment. I'm just delighted that you're expanding because I know Floracliff, and I think it's a wonderful property and great purpose, and I'm pleased that you're expanding, and I would certainly support this. More to love. It's a real treasure in Fayette County, and a lot of people don't know about it. Yeah, it's a well-kept secret. I had the pleasure of being down there this spring and I loved it. We did a spring flower walk. All flower. Yeah. Can I just ask a question? I've never been there. Is it open to the public? It is not open to the public. It is open only by appointment or for scheduled events and guided hikes. That was something that the woman who founded Flora Cliff, Dr. Mary Wharton, put in her will. She did not want the property loved to death, so there's controlled access. Okay. And again, how many acres are you expanding? Approximately 59 acres, additional acreage. Okay. All right. Thank you, Mr. Park. Any further questions from the board? If not, I'll entertain a motion. I move to approve PLNBOA 17-52, Floracliff Nature Sanctuary's request for a conditional use permit to expand an existing nature sanctuary in the agricultural rural zone at 7950 8080 30 elk lick falls and 6350 cedar lake lane for reasons recommended by the staff and subject to the five conditions outlined by staff thank you ms myers is there a second second thank you ms whitman All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye as well. Thank you. Good luck with your project. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I can't recall if we agreed to abide by the conditions, but for the record we do. You do. Thank you. Thanks for reminding me of that, Mr. Brown. Good luck to you. Thank you. Thank you all for your service. Thank you. The next unopposed application is 17-53, Board and Brush. Is the applicant present? Please come forward. We do have one letter of opposition to distribute to the Board. I'm sorry? We have one letter of opposition to distribute to you all. Okay. We'll take a look at it. Hang on for just a minute while we all read this letter and we'll get back with you. Thank you. I think so. I think so. Thank you. Thank you. My mic was not on. Could you all hear me? Yes. Let me repeat just a little bit of it for the record. We got an email, the staff got an email from Mr. Phil Makovich, who is a neighbor, whose property backs up to this commercial property, his house on Gumtree Lane. and I'm not sure I know exactly where his house is. I'm kind of curious. I'll let you take a look at this email. I'm kind of curious, where exactly in the shopping center is your establishment located? Which part of it? I mean, if you look at the address, the address shows the center building. Do you have a drawing? I could point it out to you. We have a drawing that was with the application. We've got one coming up on the projector. It's right here. Right there? Right there. Okay. Right here. Yes, the very end. The very end. Okay. We've got an overhead. Good. I see. So if you look at the overhead, that segment that's colored in yellow is the site. Is there an outdoor patio or something connected on that end? I can't. It's actually another small parking lot in the dumpster area is right in the back there. Okay. Is there? Yeah, I'm not sure. Yeah. It says in salon on Google Maps. Is that next door? Yes, I believe there's a salon. There's a learning center next door, I want to say. Okay. All right. Let me let you all take a look at this. Apparently, we only have one copy, and it's rather extensive. I'm sorry for the fact that we only got one. Yeah. There's no houses behind it. It's just a field. If I could ask you to kind of explain what the activity is and how it relates to any kind of alcohol serving, and that might help us kind of clarify what's going to be going on. And I've only read about half of this so far, but. Sorry, can I ask the applicants to state their names for the record, please? Amy Spanier. Melanie Gonzalez. Reading through, I just got about halfway through the email. He was saying that his house is, his backyard backs directly up to it, but it's just land back there. And there's a church over this way, I want to say. But I don't recall seeing any houses directly behind where we are exactly. But what we do is we host workshops kind of similar to the art and canvas type of thing, where we host specific workshops that last about two and a half to three hours, and guests come in and they make DIY home decor for their homes. And we use wood, and so we take them through the various steps, and so we wanted to have a bar inside to offer refreshments to our guests. It's all indoors? Yes. It's all indoors. Okay. Do you all have any outdoor property? is there an exterior exit out the side or back or anything? There is an exterior exit, but we wouldn't be having anything on the back side of it or anything like that. Any music proposed? Any live music? No live music. We do have TVs and we'll have just like a small sound system to just kind of play background type music during the workshops. Any other questions from the board? I would just say I think the way staff has written this up addresses most of the concerns of the neighbor. And I would, the way it's written, I think the conditions make sense of you. Are you familiar with all the conditions and have read them? Yes, and we agree to those. Okay, thank you. I think that number five we discussed, you know, how do you measure when the sale of alcoholic beverages becomes greater than the sale of art? And at that point, I don't know, but I guess we would have to, you know, might be a complaint that would be filed at that point and would have to be looked into or any other recommendations from the board. Does the staff believe that we need to add a condition as far as restricting this to indoor use or say no outdoor use or something like that? Did you all feel that was unnecessary? And if so? I think that given the location of the suite and the lack of outdoor space associated with it, it was not something that we thought of as a concern in writing the staff report. could certainly add a condition if the board felt it was necessary i'm really just asking the question i'm not advocating that it even be necessary but it sounded like there might be some concern anybody else have any concern about outdoor i didn't either so but one of the the the conditions are uh restrictive to this this application in other words if you sell the business you the new owners would have to come back uh if they wanted to continue that business and activities that involve the conditional use. So I'm curious about how you do measure primary use. Is that language sufficient for the staff? I mean, that's an enforcement question and not really one that we need to get into. Is that what you're telling me? The distinguishing between whether the primary use is alcohol sales versus art class. Yes, condition five. Right. I think that, as you mentioned, it might be if there was a complaint, that would become an issue. I think that the applicant plans to sell alcohol only in conjunction with the art class. Okay. I understand the concept, and I like it, quite frankly. I think it would be – I don't think this application is going to be disruptive to neighbors if it's the way the application is described. So I'm in favor of it. Any other questions from the board about this? One real quick question, if I could. Are you actually selling the alcohol, or is this part of the price? Yes, they would actually purchase alcohol. Purchase, okay. You have somebody. We have soda as well. So we just want to have refreshment. Okay. Thank you. We have a studio in Louisville, so it's a small percentage of our sales. The alcohol is a very small percentage of our sales. Yeah, I think we had a request from a bicycle shop that also wanted to add, and it was a similar situation. It wasn't their primary sales, but it was for their customers as they were inside. I'm not sure if it's exactly the same situation, but it was in a shopping center. So I see nothing wrong with it. Fair enough. Any other questions? If not, I'll entertain a motion. I move that we approve PLN BOA 17-53, a board and brush request for a conditional use permit to establish a cocktail lounge in conjunction with an art studio in a neighborhood business B1 zone at 4379 Old Harrodsburg Road, Suite 170. Based on the staff's two reasons and subject to their five conditions. Thank you, Mr. Needham. Is there a second? Second. Second. From Mr. Clark, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? I'm in favor as well. Thank you. Unanimous. Thank you very much. good luck with your project. Thank you so much. Okay, where are we? Okay, go back. Go back to this one. Did we go back to this one? Yeah, I think so. We have next on the agenda is PLN VOA 17-56, Jitendra and Nellam Ben Patel, if the applicants would come forward please to the microphone and identify yourselves. Yeah, Bob Patel. It's in the mic, son. Okay. Mr. Patel, the staff has recommended disapproval of your application for variance to reduce the front setback. Tell us what your application is for and why. And But in- For him? Well, either one of you can speak. Because of dad have like two knee surgeries, one already in April, last April, one coming in February. And mom have already two knee surgeries. And we need just additional one parking, so easy to go in and out. That's the main reason. Could we see it on the overhead and explain what we're looking at here, please? It looks to me like from the picture that we're seeing on the overhead that the additional paving in the front yard is that on the left side. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. And how wide is that? It is nine feet, right? Yeah, nine feet. An old one, 17 feet. How do you enter the house? How do you get into the house? Normally we use the garage door. We have two cars. We have a total of three cars. So as soon as they want to come in, so you go all the way down straight in there. If you have one car beside that. Is it a two-car garage or three? Yeah, two-car. Two-car garage. So you go in through the garage? Correct. Sorry. So I'm not quite sure I understand why you need that additional. Reason where like you have three car total, so one two car on the side, so we don't have enough room to his car go all the way down inside the garage. Especially in the winter weather or rainy weather because of the knee surgery and mom and dad. So you're a three-car family with a two-car garage, basically. Correct. And who had the knee surgery? He had a knee surgery. Mom had a knee surgery, too. He done in the last year. Is there anything else you want to say before we hear from staff? Because I think the staff had some things to say, reasons for recommending a disapproval. Anything else you want to say about? Only that's the reason why we did it. So if you approve, it's very great. Otherwise, only the medical reason we did that. Okay, let's hear from staff. Tell us, Autumn, what you all can have a seat for a minute. Just stay nearby and we'll hear from staff. And then we may have some questions for you in a few minutes. Thank you. Daff's recommendation of disapproval is based on the layout of the property and the dimension of the side yard seem to be such that they would allow for compliant additional parking here. What would be required for that would be a six-foot setback from the front property line and a two-foot setback from the side lot line. As it is, anything that exceeds the driveway width is considered additional parking. And so this piece of pavement could essentially be made compliant by removing a diagonal piece towards the front of the property up to six feet back to create that setback as well. It appears that the applicant could pave further back past the house and have ample room to have a sufficient parking space there. So you're basically saying cut off six feet from the front, repave six feet back or some distance back, just extending that paved area into the side yard. Is that what I'm understanding? What about the two foot on the side? They would have to maintain the two feet. I believe we covered in the staff report that the side yard setback decreases from 15, I'm sorry, it's 22 feet at the front of the property, decreasing back to 15 feet from the rear corner of the house to the side lot line. So it satisfies the amount of space needed to. It does satisfy in existing configuration the requirements on the side yard. Right. Okay. Another reason that staff has recommended disapproval of this property is that it is in a newly developing neighborhood. There are still several houses that are in the process of going up now, and we believe it would set a dangerous precedent for allowing this sort of forgiveness for unpermitted paving. And I agree with you. Any questions from the board to Ms. Midyett? Just to make it clear, if that triangle in the front of that space was removed, would that then meet conditions? Grab my pointer here. Yeah. Sorry. Kind of new to this pointer thing. So if we were to remove from starting at the rear of the sidewalk there and take a diagonal back to where this dimension here was six feet, that's typically how that is handled. Does that make sense? That didn't make any sense to me. I don't quite understand either. the the setback typically whenever this gets approved it doesn't have to be a the property line starts at the the back side of the sidewalk there yeah so this would definitely need to be removed and then if you removed starting at the the corner here a triangular shape to where this dimension was met the six foot setback typically it is allowed to to splay out in such a way to get to that six foot. So taking out that diagonal triangle shape there as well as this bit of paving here. And then they could go back along the side of the garage. He could continue back along the side, yes. So six feet from that left edge there? Correct. the um so the sixth street here i missed what you were referring to earlier so there is enough uh setback on the left side for them to put this driveway around the house and park in the back i'm well not in the back but on along the side so long as as the paving meets the the two foot set back so they have a minimum of 15 feet here um from the and that's at the rear corner of the house so they would be able to extend over 13 feet pavement without our without right by right in any event they uh if we uh if we disapprove the application then what would be the process will they come back to the city or will they come back to you all and say what correct they would They would need to confer with traffic and get a paving permit so they would be able to discuss at that time with traffic engineering and building inspection what that needs to look like if they're unclear. Right, okay. That makes sense to me. I don't think we need to be in the business of designing it for them. There are people who know more than we do about that. So really the question is just whether we grant the application or disapprove it, as I understand it. Is that right? Any other questions of staff from the board? Just quickly, probably doesn't make any difference, but why would they need to pave on the side of the house? wouldn't there still be enough room left on that on that new section for the parker car if if the applicant desired to pave back further um i'm not sure how much space they need for their vehicle from but basically we're saying it would be an option if cutting away the the six foot to make it compliant left them with a shorter dimension than they preferred they would have the option to extend further back beyond so if they could if they needed to okay yeah any further questions uh by the board to staff about that let me let's talk to the applicants again thank you autumn for the explanation Mr. Patel, did you all understand what was being explained by staff? Yes. Okay. Basically, it would require that you come talk to the people who have the jurisdiction to decide these things, and they may be able to give you further direction. May not, but they may be able to. I'd start with the planning staff and see who they can recommend to you. Now, I'm being presumptive here. We don't have any motion on the floor, so it may be that we don't know the outcome of this. Any other questions of the applicants or of the staff from the board? I mean, you did this obviously after you had your house finished. Almost same time. Correct. Yeah. I mean, obviously in my view, you know, that has, you just can't do that without a plan and approval. and this I think does set a precedent moving forward that this is okay. And so my opinion would be that we would probably, or at least in my view, I would agree with disapproval, but you can go back and modify this to where it would be legal. And that's my opinion. And mine as well. Any other questions to the applicants? If not, we'll entertain a motion. I move that we, well, I guess it's recommending disapproval, so I would, that we approve the disapproval. I think you can say you move to disapprove the application. I move to disapprove the application PLN BOA 17-56, Jitendra and Nalamban Patel's request for variance to reduce the required front setback for additional paved parking from 6 feet to 0 feet in a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone at 3877 Moon Coin Way. Based on staff's reasons. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Second for Mr. Clark. Motion by Mr. Needham, second by Mr. Clark. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none. The motion carries, and so the application for a variance is disapproved, which means that you all are going to have to talk to the planning staff about what to do about that paving. And good luck to you. Thank you. Okay. thank you next on the agenda is 17-58 lester stutter the applicant is present mr stutter thank you for your patience please come forward and to the microphone We do have one letter of opposition to distribute. Okay. I'm Lester Studer. This is Kathy Schriefer. We both live at the residence. Let us take a look at this letter in opposition we got. Just hang loose for just a second. You can have a seat or stand there and let us take a look at it. It looks like a short email from somebody in opposition to the application. All right, thank you. Do we have a picture that we could put up on the overhead, on the screen, please? Thank you. Mr. Stetter, the letter or email we got in opposition was fairly short and basically said it. I have hearing aids in, sir. Could you speak up just a little bit? Certainly. Sorry if you can't hear me. The letter that we got from, I'm not sure who that's from. Let me. uh from mary gullett uh 3403 greentree road she's in opposition to your application and uh it's a short letter but basically uh agrees with with the staff recommendation of disapproval so tell us about your application and why you want this approved Yeah. We have a 25-foot camper. You may have to speak up yourself and into the microphone so we can hear you. That would help. If you need the handheld microphone, it's right there on the dock in front of you. All right. That's good, right? Make sure that's turned on at the bottom. There's a switch on the bottom, I found out. okay we have a 25 foot camper that we that's the reason we put this driveway in and on this side of the property on the right side yes yes sir it slopes down it just i mean it falls off and the camper barely fits on the driveway that is there that we put had put there um the we had the sidewalk redone because it was all broken up tore up and um we uh have three we have three car we have a truck and two cars and we can only use one part of our garage because we have two mopeds in there and all of our stuff that we moved in we've only lived there a year and that's the reason we put the driveway in in the first place for our camper we put it on the other side of the house and it was just too massive and too close to the other neighbor's house so and we were going to put it back against farther back but if there's bushes and and things back there that prevented us from putting it back any farther so the contractor said that he had gotten the permit he told me don't worry don't worry i take care of everything well obviously he didn't so we came down and got the permit afterwards um do you want to say something sir like we're saying the driveway is sloped we have enough room to put the camper up in the very top of the driveway next to the garage where it levels off having three vehicles and the camper that is a very busy street every every hour i mean it's always traffic and it's so hard to get in and out of just a regular driveway and the reason why we did this is to make our property look better along with other residentials that looking good and easier access out of the driveway without getting hit. There has been several accidents, you know, over there, and that is the access road for Tates Creek School. They come down that road every day. I mean, it's traffic all the time. We thought it was doing good by putting it up there the way it is, and after I found this out, you can't have a driveway over 24 foot. It actually measures out 28. Well, I measured right at 38.8, and it was under, so I just rounded it off to 28 foot of the 4 foot variance. and that's why we come here to ask for help and trying to do right. And in reference to Mary's letter, since we've moved in there, she has complained about everything. The day we moved in this house, I mean the day we moved in, we were still moving in. And she came over and told us that we could not have the box. And they weren't even our boxes. It was the people that lived there before us. They moved out that night. We moved in that day. They left all of their boxes out there. And she came over and was having a fit because those boxes were there. They weren't even ours. Is she an next-door neighbor? Yes. Yes. So we had to haul off these people's boxes, you know, that weren't even ours. And then we have some wood on this side where they had finished the driveway. And she came outside. Mel was getting ready to go to Pennsylvania. And she came outside and asked, are you going to clean that up or what? I mean, they were stacked. It's not like it's all over the place. But what I was trying to do is make it look better as you go by, make it look, you know, reasonable, you know, through the public of them driving by instead of me not having a driveway. And I was told by the patrol person that goes around, checks properties if you're illegal parking and they told me if I put mulch that was considered as a paved driveway well I didn't want to do that because it would tear up the yard and I wanted to make it look good and that's reason why I'm asking for a four-foot variance if I'm correct any questions from the board we're looking at submitted with this application was a drawing of the house is that what you all tendered or is this sir I drew that up I tried to draw it up the best of my ability of doing it what was asked by this lady over here on my left. I'd like to ask the staff what what would it take then to make this a legal parking space? Mr. Stutter if you all can have a seat we're going to process is to hear from the applicant and then we can hear from staff and we'll have some we may have some questions of you later so This project is very similar to the Patel project that we just heard. The similar solution would be to create that six-foot setback that we talked about before with the diagonal cut from the edge of the sidewalk back six feet. Why a diagonal cut? I don't understand that part. if it's if you put the put something back up there maybe put the drawing up there with the that was submitted with the application and we can talk about that drawing. Do you all have the drawing? Also the staff indicated that the second variance would be necessary because of the side the side dimensions is that correct? I'm sorry, yes, there would need to be a variance. Additionally, if you were to approve the six-foot variance, to leave it as it is, you would also need to approve a two-foot variance for the side yard setback. It appears that the paving currently goes up to at least the property line. When you said property line, you mean the side yard property line? The side line, yes, sir. And what's the allowance, two feet? Two feet. Two feet. and the driveway as it exists extends into that two-foot setback? Is that what you're saying? Correct, yes. Okay. So the side yard variance, I'm sorry, the side yard allowance of two feet, this additional paving exceeds that? Correct. And it also exceeds the total driveway width of 24 feet? The driveway is defined as no more than 24 feet in the zoning ordinance. Anything beyond 24 feet is considered additional parking. And that's where the front and side setbacks kick in of six feet and two feet. So that's where we are with the variance, why it's a request for a front yard and side yard variance rather than a request to widen the driveway. Okay. Do you have the drawing you can put up there? Because we may have some questions about that. We all have copies of that that we've been looking at, and it looks like that bottom right section, that portion, is the section that we're talking about. It looks to me from this drawing that the existing driveway is 16 feet, approximately in width and the additional paving is 12 feet in width is that is that correct so for a total of 28 feet so he's four feet over on the maximum width and he's also more than two feet closer to the side yard is that the product and what about the diagonal cut I'm not sure I understood that the diagonal cut could start at the 24 foot mark in width and would anything beyond that 24 feet would need to have that diagonal mark to the six-foot setback that's just the practice that has been established for for how we get the six foot setback not the whole to gradually allow the pavement to go back so that you have a way to get there basically rather than having a block six feet okay but you still need four feet off that side two feet off the side line yes so So to make it compliant would be a matter of removing a strip along here to get that two-foot distance from the sideline, as well as a triangular shape here to get the six-foot setback from the 24-foot and width. A driveway of 26 feet or 20. Yeah. the driveway would be 24 feet and then there would be that side the angled cut to a full total width at the widest of 26 yes yeah at six feet past the sidewalk at two two feet right yeah yeah and if the applicant wanted to remove if there's is there room along the side of the they have 10 feet from the side of the house to the property line so they would have and then you'd have that two foot setback again so they would have eight feet that they could pave yes along the side okay any further questions to autumn from the board anybody thank you any further questions to mr stutter and i'm sorry tell me your name again ma'am strafer any further questions of the applicants i do have a question did you all understand what miss midgett was was explaining about the uh about cutting it about uh removing a portion of that yeah you got to move the uh eight got to cut the apron out and come up on the sidewalk side towards the house up six feet and cut like a pie shape yeah at an angle from the sidewalk back which is in other words well 24 feet right yeah I mean the building apartment yeah and I think we're not you know we're not the people to ask about how that should be done but if you don't if you have questions about that recommendation or that suggestion for a remedy to make it compliant then you can talk to talk to planning staff uh the uh and get further instructions from them and again i'm i'm making a presumption that uh that the board is going to follow the recommendation of staff i'm not sure about that because we haven't had a motion uh presented but that's that's what it sounds like where we're going so diagonal i mean yeah i mean and that uh we're not the best people to ask for details about that so talk to staff they may direct you to somebody else who can give you more we would direct you to traffic engineering right because everybody on our street has the exact same driveway we have exact same driveway that comes out like that right yes sure and that's we're pleading to you know make our house look better you know I'm that's reason why I'm trying to do everything right I thought everything everything was being taken care of on permit and everything this is a I believe a valuable lesson to us but I'm pleading my case to ask for forgiveness to get the variance of four foot if I'm right on this yes and we're I understand, and that is what you're doing. You're asking for forgiveness for not complying with the requirements and the regulations. And the recommendation is that we not give you that permission. And I'm sensing that that's where the board is going. but instead of tearing out the entire additional paving, there are remedies that other people can tell you about better than the Board of Adjustment can. So, like I say, we don't have a motion yet, but you heard the last applicant, and this is a similar situation. and there are precedent-setting cases. In the last case you heard, in this case as well, set precedence and may, if gone unenforced, allow other people to believe that they can construct outside the boundaries of the permitted ordinances. so that's the reason why this is before us and it's up to us to decide whether your application is approved or not and like I say, the staff has recommended disapproval for the reasons they've stated so anything else from the board? Any other questions to the applicants today? If not, I'll entertain a motion I move that we disapprove PLNBOA 17-58 Lester Struders request for variance to reduce the front setback from six feet to zero feet for an additional paved area in a single family residential R1C zone at 3407 Green Tree Road for the reasons recommended by staff. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Mr. Needham. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion to disapprove is granted, is approved. That's confusing. The application is denied for the reasons stated by staff. And, Mr. Stutter, you can talk to the staff, you can talk to traffic engineering or whoever else you need to to figure out how to make your property compliant in light of what the board has decided today. Okay. I'll have to talk to somebody about getting it back the way it was correctly before I started. Well, that's what I'm saying. You don't necessarily have to put it back the way it was before you started. there may be better options for you and you can get some advice if you choose from the professionals that are here today. Okay, so I'll just go to planning and ask them what I got to do. Yes, that's what I would do if it were me. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And the last case on our agenda is 17-57 Bears and Dogs, LLC. I understand there's opposition as well. If Bears and Dogs would come forward and identify yourself, we'll hear your application. Hi, Rebecca Wichert, counsel for Bears and Dogs. Hi, Brian Bear, owner of Bears and Dogs. Okay. Okay. We're requesting the conditional use permit and variants be issued based on bear and dogs application as well as the staff recommendation. The requested permit and variants will have no adverse impact on public health, safety, or welfare. There's no physical change to any of the existing structures and it's not an unreasonable circumvention of the zoning as the staff pointed out. It is within the 100 feet of the residential zoning, but there's actually no residences in that particular area. This building is located on Limestone on UK's campus and- On the west side, right? Sorry. On the west side of the street? It is. Let's see here. That's an unfair question, isn't it? It's across from the new dorms. The east side of the street, actually. According to- Now you've confused me. South Limestone, yeah. It'll be on the east side of the street across the street from UK. It's actually northwest. Yeah, that's true. Thank you. Yeah, the lines don't run exactly north-south, so that was, like I say, a confusing question. Yeah, it was a trick question. I think I understand. Are you next door to Jimmy John's? Yes. Okay. So there's a large patio there is where we want the music to be played. Is that patio the front of your business? Yes, it is. Okay. So the way that it's set back, I just want to clarify. The way that it's set back, we have the bar inside there and the bar outside. But the bar outside, sorry, I'm confusing you. It may actually be helpful. He submitted a drawing, and if we could put that up on the screen and then point things out, that might better explain. That'd be helpful. If staff could put that drawing up on the screen and not make it too dark in here so we can't read stuff. We'll take a look at that. There should be a pointer somewhere up there that you can use. Don't point it at me. Okay. So this is limestone here. This is our front patio in this area here. Yeah, you better. It's going to be difficult for you to, for us to hear you without the addition of that microphone. Okay. So this is limestone here. This is our patio here. Wait, but before you go any further, we still can't hear you. maybe it's not turned on or not being held close enough to you okay can you hear me now can you hear me now yes that's that's better sorry about that okay okay so we have limestone here we had our patio here the outside bar is this little area here in the middle um this is all inside here This is where we're requesting to play music projecting out onto our patio as you can see it set back about 65 70 feet or so So the initial issue was we have got a deck right here as well And one night when I wasn't there We had someone set up to DJ and play out into this area from there Which we usually have them this is inside as I mentioned in here projecting out onto the patio That's what we someone complained about was the fact that we had people outside DJing Even though that's not what we consistently do and not what we're asking for as well here You know when when we got that Complaint I got a call from whoever it was and called him back and I i just understood it was a formality to get this variant set up so that we can play music to play outside as i mentioned it's not like we have like people set up here or anywhere closer to our parameters we're still technically inside here projecting out onto our to the customers they're on the patio and just to follow up on that so to to clarify at the south limestone street at to the very top. There are actually hedges there and this is a really common thing on the street if you all are familiar with the other like businesses. They're actually, the live music itself is indoor where he was pointing to and there's a door that opens up and allows the sound to go outside. This particular structure, unlike the other structures that permit similar music and entertainment is surrounded by buildings and so it will probably actually better diffuse the sound than like businesses which are operating virtually in the same fashion else I want to I want to point this out that um we have a couple trees here as well that block out a lot that block out a lot of the sound and this is a long large wall as is this is all part of Pazzo's building and this is obviously the back of our building so as mentioned this is pretty much in the center of our property here where we uh proposed to play are you talking about live music or recorded music like a dj okay yeah I'm referring to the drawing again that's up on the overhead. Is it, am I reading this correctly, that the interior of the building is 25 feet wide? Yes. Yes. Okay, and what is that additional 15 feet to the left of it? Is that outdoors? There's an alley way there. Yeah, where no one really goes, it's just a passageway around the building. Okay. And to clarify on the other side of that is the positive structure, which is a two story structure. Yes, yes. Is your structure one story? Yes, well, I mean, there's a basement to it, but ours is raised about, say like like maybe eight feet or less probably like six feet so there's stairways there that like goes about this high I'd say okay I just want to make sure I understand the musician the musicians are going to be inside and the pad the doors are going to be open correct as a garage door the music can waft out correct so when I was speaking with the gentleman who you know he said there was a complaint and I said he said it sounds like you're playing music outside on the on the patio and I said there's a deck there and that's that's where the complaint stemmed from and that was inconsistent with I mean that was that was a one-time the guy set up in the wrong place because I wasn't there and didn't tell him where to set up so that's why he was there in the first place he was outside the covered patio he was yes on the one incident and think jan just so you can clarify so so where you have proposed area to play are you trying to go where you where you have the proposed area to play music to project a patio that is going to be inside and between those two uh shaped yeah right there's a door going out between those two um check or marks that's where the uh garage door correct that's the yeah besides they will sit behind that garage door or were they they would stand inside and and project to people standing out on the patio okay all right i got that we're i'm a little confused about where pauses original building is relative due to that sorry can you hear me okay so Pazzo's is all of this space here this is the main entrance to Pazzo's right here okay I see it now I understand okay I'm way too familiar with Pazzo's So you're in between, you've got Pazzo's is three stories, and then on the other side of you, you've got a two-story building. Correct. Are there other bars and restaurants that have live music in this block? Yes. What are they? Two Keys, Paddock, Other Bar, Tin Roof. Yeah. The tin roof's not outside though. They're not projecting outside, are they? Correct, but it's similar in the fact that they have a garage door that's open and the people that are on their patio can enjoy that music. I would say that it's virtually similar type of projection. I mean, they open their doors, their band faces out and is in two keys similarly. And actually, they're much closer to the sidewalk than this proposed location would be. but they also have the large doors that open and the music that finds its way outside. I wonder if that's been approved. You know, I bet it has not. I mean. The concern, I think, from the people in opposition, at least the written opposition we have, and proposedly from the people who have yet to speak, is going to be the noise. so what do you say about that i mean people are uh it's uh if are you saying we're just part of the neighborhood by what i would say yeah that and the fact that um i'm not convinced it's it's that loud outside of that that space um because of the fact of where i said that we're playing and projecting and because of the different barriers we have in between those uh spaces uh essentially you're farther from the street that's what you're saying yes and you're between two buildings that are uh beside you so uh you're farther from your the the people that uh are across the street in the dormitory for example are farther physically from your proposed music playing than than other people on the street is that what you're saying yes okay staff has recommended that um entertainment with amplified music be thursday through saturday nights beginning no earlier than nine and ending no later than one would you all agree to that i was hoping to get that moved to two since the bars do close at 2 30. other than that yes And that's merely consistent with the other like bars on the same or on neighboring blocks. Can I ask staff a question? I think the point that was brought up on, it's very similar to, let's say, five other bars on that strip, his neighbors, his competition, however you want to call them. The only one that we see has been approved for what it is that Bears and Dogs is asking for is Tin Roof. Is that correct? That is correct. The conditional use allowing for outdoor live entertainment is relatively new to the zoning ordinance. So I would venture that a number of those bars have been operating as such for an indeterminate amount of time and have not received a complaint similar to this, and that's why we haven't seen them. Right, so they very well could be if someone complained in the next day or two that they too would have to come in for the same reason. Correct, for outdoor entertainment. I did just want to re-edify the fact that this complaint was stemmed from something that is not related to how we usually operate. It was outlier experience or incident. So maybe that evening from being risen up where they were, maybe it was louder and it was causing an issue. I don't know because, like I said, I wasn't there. However, that evening was a good evening. So in the future, if we want to do it again, we'll ask for conditional use. Okay. So two keys does not have the same. There was not any record of any conditional use for Two Keys, and I guess they would be considered potentially a non-conforming use. I don't want to make a statement about whether or not Two Keys is operating correctly or not, but the only examples of similar situations was the tin roof example. Where is tin roof located in relation to this piece of property? Max one line. Okay, I see. Yeah, block and a half up the street. Oh, yeah. I mean, it's notoriously a college strip. Right. So you all were asking, actually, for every night. I don't see anything that you specified. The staff is recommending. Sorry, I didn't realize I needed to set parameters. but yeah i mean i'm comfortable with doing it just thursday through saturday yeah whatever yeah okay okay so you're comfortable with the thursday through saturday night recommended by the staff yes but i was also like i mentioned i was hoping to get that moved to two o'clock instead of one o'clock i don't understand i feel i feel like it just needs to be consistent I mean, I hate to give an undue burden on him if his neighbors don't have the same burden. I'm just thinking out loud. I appreciate that. I'm kind of feeling the same way. I don't know what the rest of the board feels about this. I do have some sympathy for the neighbors, and maybe at this time it might be good for us to hear from the opposition. So if you all have a seat, we'll hear from other people and get back in touch with you. Thank you. I understand that there is opposition to this application, so if you all want to come forward, tell us who you are and what you have to say. Yes, ma'am. Can you hear me? If you pull that microphone down towards you just a bit, that'd be great. My name is Carolyn Gago. I live in Lexington, 431 Adair. I own properties in South Hill Station. I am here representing 63 condominiums in South Hill Station. Are you an attorney? I am not. I am president of the association. Okay. I would like to contest this and tell you the way I feel about it. These are condominiums. These are not dorms. We're a catty corner across the street on the corner of Upper and Bolivar. We have the residents in our building, students, professors, doctors, professional people, business people. You said Upper and what? Upper and Bolivar. Oliver, okay. We have people living there. They're not just renting there. There are renters in the building, but there are people who own these condos and live there. They have expectations of privacy, of quiet, of peace during the week. I understand Friday and Saturday night, but I will tell you that the position of this building is like a horn, a chamber, where music comes along between the buildings and amplifies. It's all paved. There's hardly any grass. There's hardly any trees back there to absorb the noise, and the noise comes through. And the kids today don't listen to melodic music. They listen to thumping music. You want to try and go to bed at 11 o'clock and hear something thump all night, that's what you'd hear. It's not pleasant. I know from experience, because I have a condo in Florida within a block of a street where they have music until 11, and we hear the music until 11. My position is, I understand Friday and Saturday night. I do not understand during the week. I do not understand until 2 in the morning. Not when you have professional people nearby, when you have doctors, when you have two hospitals up the street, because our doctors live right in this area so they can get to these hospitals. This constitutes a nuisance to nearby residential people. He's talking about the tin roof and the paddock and what was that other one, two keys. They're a block and a half away. They're further from us. There is a vacant lot, not lot, I shouldn't say lot, a vacant building where a restaurant used to be on the corner of Limestone and Avenue of Champions, Euclid, if you want to call it that, that is empty now. this will set a precedent. If someone wants to go in there and open a bar and have outdoor music, there's already a patio. You can't stop them if you allow this one. And where are your condos again? I'm on the map. South Hill Station. Corner of your South Hill Station. Corner of Bolivar and Upper. Got it. And behind me, I don't know who's here today to say this. I'm here with 63 condos that have asked me to speak. The immediately behind this is Center Court. Center Court should be here talking as well. Whether they are or not, I don't know, because I didn't talk to anybody else except my board. That's pretty much what I have to say. I do not agree with the Thursday night. I do not agree with the 2 o'clock in the morning. Your complaint is primarily about the noise. Yes, sir. And one thing I would like to say, I could not see because they're showing you on this map, and we could not see it from the back where they're pointing. On that map, there is a covered patio in the back near a parking lot. This is what you would constitute overflow where people go out and party on nice nights. That is very close to us. We already deal with people urinating in the doorways. We already deal with beer cans and drinking and we have video security and security on our doors now to keep the drunks out. It's not an easy place to be because of the partying that goes on on limestone. If you allow outdoor music this close to the dorms, this close to the residential condo buildings, such as Center Court and South Hill Station, then you're going to begin to have trouble. I can just about guarantee it. Thank you, Ms. Galligan. Any questions to Ms. Galligan while she's here at the microphone? Thank you, ma'am. Next. my name is Wayne Wilson and I live at 535 South Upper which is center court I'm here representing myself not the association because I own my piece of property and for the last year my bedroom my living room the bed I sleep in vibrates from the noise generated from this building from which building their building they projected out the back there's nothing to stop the noise that come i live directly behind that building and maybe you people would like to go to sleep at 11 or 12 o'clock and feel the whole bedroom vibrate including the bed but i don't and i recommend disapproval of the entire project and i assume there's a noise ordinance that requires an 11 o'clock cutoff. Now, I don't know if this planning nonsense overrides that, but an ordinance is an ordinance. I've got a question about that. Mr. Wilson raises a point. Are the establishments that are playing until 2.30? Are they outside the ordinance? I don't know what the ordinance provides. The noise ordinance doesn't absolutely prohibit those types of activities it just means that they can't be done in a way that's and i don't know exactly how the noise ordinance is worded but it can't be done in a way that's disturbing across a property line so it doesn't outright prohibit it but it does give an opportunity for them to have to change the way they're presenting the music so that it's not disturbing but it is something very difficult police enforces that and it is a very difficult enforcement challenge i i would say i've called the police five or six times in the last year and they've done nothing nothing at all and the music was going last night till 2 30 in the morning and then at three o'clock columbia gas started jackhammering so it was a wonderful evening to sleep in my house We're not laughing because we think it's funny. It just sounds rather sad if you can't get a night's sleep in your own place. So, Mr. Wilson, thank you. Any questions to Mr. Wilson while he's here at the microphone? Thank you very much. Thank you. My name is Mike Kovash. I live at 371 South Upper Street, and I am today representing the Historic South Hill Neighborhood Association. So could you put that on the projector, please? There we go. Okay, well then let me just say this is a letter from the association president. I'm just a member of the board. I'm representing the board. And this board's opposition is based on spillover noise and how it impacts the historic South Hill neighborhood. So this is a broad sampling of the neighborhood, which is reflected in this opposition. And applies to both the front and the back areas of the property. So I'd like to amplify this a bit after having read this letter. This is not a new issue in South Hill. The question of noise and the nuisance factors associated with noise, especially with noise associated with bars on South Limestone, is this longstanding one. I've been in my house for 17 years, and this issue has arisen many, many times over. I did want to say, though, that South Hill as a whole is more than 50 percent owner-occupied. So many people think of it as renter's haven, but in fact it's largely owner-occupied. Mr. Kovach, where is South Hill in relation to this piece of property? South Hill abuts this property. And, in fact, the noise that projects off of this property and, in fact, off of all properties on South Limestone Street goes right directly into South Hill. So again, we know this empirically. We know there are effective and ineffective ways to deal with noise in terms of the controls. The effective way is to not allow amplified sound outside of a building. That's the effective way to make this work. The ineffective way to do this is to grant conditional variances, for example, which say that you will not create a noise nuisance. The police are not effective at noise control. We've had meetings with the police repeatedly, and they seem insulted that we look to them to come out at midnight and to enforce the noise ordinances. Also, of course, this requires the residents to complain at midnight, which is not the time of day when people want to be out enforcing conditional approvals. That's not our job to enforce conditional approvals. There's nobody who takes that job on enforcing conditional approvals. I'd like to read from the staff report what the staff wrote related to Tin Roof, which has come up here. It says, in the 2009 report, it was noted that at the 2008 public hearing, there was no opposition in the request for live music and dancing. Key differences between that request and this application include the need for a variance and the fact that outdoor entertainment was not part of the tin roof application. Outdoor entertainment was not part of the application. That is one key difference. The second key difference is that we as a neighborhood association work directly with the owners of tin roof to make sure that they would not become a noise nuisance. In fact, one of the architects who lives in South Hill designed the soundstage for Tin Roof. There have been other cases that have come up at the corner of Maxwell and South Upper, where we again worked directly with the owners to verify and to make sure that sounds did not come out. That hasn't happened in this particular application. Others have made a particular point of noting that if this is approved, it does set a precedent. Also, this sound, as we've heard, projects southwest into the neighborhoods, because of the orientations of the buildings, and it does so effectively, Whereas the garage doors on Two Keys and perhaps other garage doors that face limestone send the sound across Limestone Street. That's not into South Hill. So the sounds that we hear are not coming from Two Keys. They're not coming from Tin Roof because those garage doors are not facing towards South Hill. So there are other effective sound sources that we do hear. and this would be one of them, surely. Second thing I'd like to read from the staff report is recommendation or condition number four, all music entertainment shall be provided in a manner that does not create a nuisance to the surrounding neighborhood. This is vague and unenforceable. Vague and unenforceable. It's equivalent to talking to kids and saying, play nice. And we know what that does. Since this is a variance request, positive controls are required. You can't just say, play nice. You need positive controls. Waking the neighborhood to assure compliance at midnight is not an appropriate form of positive control. the approval list the reasons given for approval in the again in the staff report it will not alter the character of the general vicinity and will not cause a hazard or nuisance to the public provided there are limits on the hours of operation and amplification is prohibited and amplification is prohibited. These are reasons for approval. How can amplification is prohibited be a reason to grant this request? And then in recommendation number three, amplified music shall be limited to Thursday through Saturday, etc., etc. How can we reason that amplified music is prohibited and yet below that amplified music shall be limited, etc., etc.? That is irrational. Finally, in the staff report again, the last large paragraph, it said, it should be noted that the need for this application was prompted by the division's enforcement office response to a citizen complaint regarding noise disturbances and of course we've heard others today it was learned that a conditional use for live entertainment and dancing had not been obtained and that to obtain such a conditional use a variance would be needed to reduce the required 100 foot setback so we can read this this is krs 100.243 now i'm not a lawyer so we have legal staff here who can help with this number two this is these are findings necessary for granting variances, the Board shall deny any request for a variance arising from circumstances that are the result of willful violations of the zoning regulations by the applicant subsequent to the adoption of those regulations from which relief is sought. This seems pretty clear. So, these are the opinions of the Historic South Hill Neighborhood Association. Thank you, Mr. Kovach. Any questions for this witness? As a result of, I guess, the points that Mr. Kovach raised, I look back at my notes on the staff report, And I have some questions of the staff. Are there any other witnesses here to testify in opposition? I don't see any. I have some questions of staff, and I think maybe the board does too. But I'm a little curious about what I read as an apparent inconsistency in the staff report about amplified music. I had that noted as well as one thing. And Mr. Kovach raised it, so it prompts me to raise a question. is amplified music prohibited or not? I'm looking for where it's... If you look at C on the reasons for approval, the last part of the first sentence, it says it will not alter the character of the general vicinity. You know, as we develop these staff reports, there's a lot of team input, and as we got to having to finalize it, there was a lot of discussion about conditions. And the original application, at least how it came across, was pretty much unrestricted in terms of days and hours and that kind of thing. So we spent a lot of time thinking through how best to condition this. one version was a lot more somewhat more restrictive than the one that was actually finalized and it's a simple explanation in the findings we did not go back and fine-tune that appropriately and that's my mistake where it says in finding number c that application amplification is prohibited that's as the gentleman spoke earlier pointed out is inconsistent consistent with the conditions. So that's our bad and it's amplification is limited, but it's not outright prohibited, at least based on how our staff report is presented. Right. I see that as well. As to the other point that Mr. Kovacs raised about the condition number four about not creating a nuisance, And again, I don't know how you measure that. That's up to code enforcement to enforce the conditions or by annual review of these kinds of conditional uses or some other way like that. I agree with you that police are not the best way to enforce noise ordinance violations. Who is? Who does enforce the noise ordinance? We were just discussing that. I think that in regard to enforcement of the noise ordinance, it is the public safety, which would be police. Police, and I'm not sure they're the best equipped to do it, quite frankly. It's unfortunate. But you're right, that is a rather vague standard on condition number four. I would agree with you there. Any questions from the board on this application, either to the applicant or to the opposition or to staff, about any part of the application. I was just wondering about the original request deals with the setback. That's the primary request. And in that, it doesn't say anything about noise. and so I'm just wondering how that plays into the application. The request is for a conditional use permit for the indoor and outdoor entertainment and the variance for the setback. So the conditional use is what takes care of the allowance for noise or restriction of. Does that, I'm not sure what your question is beyond that. Yeah, it is a double request. It's a request for conditional use and a request for a variance. So, that's noted in that first paragraph in the staff report. I have mixed feelings about this application. Ms. Meyer? I do, too. And I'm wondering if, have you had any discussions with these folks who are here today? Have I had discussions? Yeah, I mean, I'm wondering if you could. No one has ever come to me and complained. Well, I'm just wondering, having heard what you've heard today, maybe it would be beneficial for you all to sit down and discuss this, and maybe you could come up with a solution that you could still have the music. I'm thinking, I mean, if you have it just inside, I don't know. That's where we have it. Well, but if you're having it, it's floating out. side well i mean you know with due respect i mean music music's gonna i mean if we play it anywhere inside you're gonna be able to hear it outside i mean because it's just so loud well i mean you know now we're starting to argue how loud am i allowed to play music i mean and i understand i understand i think there are i think there are aren't there some we've had but i mean discussions before about the decibel level haven't we with other i can appreciate that i'm I'm happy to play it at a certain decibel. But for someone to tell me that their living room is vibrating because of it is an exaggeration. Well, I think it might. I would like to see this continue, personally. I'm very happy to play at an appropriate level. And I think you need discussions with the people who are here who are affected by what you're doing. If we could respectfully respond globally to the complaints today, as Mr. Baer said, he has not received any direct complaints from them. This was more of a formality. He was acting proactively to abide by the rules in this area. There have been no direct complaints with the exception of the one event where there was outdoor music. He's not requesting that he have an outdoor DJ. And maybe we could take that drawing, if you could show that one more time. If you take into consideration the locations of the individuals or apartment condos here responding to this request today, they're located relatively far from this building. The Boulevard, I believe, is several blocks. And then South Hill is actually, as they mentioned, are more adjacent to Tin Roof. And again, if you do look at the way that this garage door is opening up, it's truly facing the student housing on Limestone. It is not, there's no intention, there's really no activity behind the building, with the exception of the overflow that was discussed. And again, that is not where this music is being played or projected. It is truly facing out one garage door from the inside of the building onto South Limestone. And so we would respectfully ask that you consider the location of this specific request, particularly in light of the competitors on the street, which have apparently failed to take the extra steps to act appropriately and seek the correct variances and approval of the board. So we'd appreciate that consideration. I have a question. Are you all playing music now? I mean, does the bar exist and play music? Yes, we play music through our speakers. Through the speakers. And you have a DJ or something like that? We have a DJ who currently plays inside. he's there where the yes that's like right in the middle of our restaurant and as a follow-up to that question um one of the respondents this afternoon mentioned that he's been hearing the sound for over a year um this particular bar opened in march of this year um so it's only been operating for a few months um and so to the extent that any sound was heard prior to march of 2017, it was not my client making that sound, which I think further supports that what they're requesting is not out of the ordinary on this block. And I think one of the reasons we're having mixed feelings about it is we understand the cumulative effect of the sound coming from this neighborhood affecting a residential neighborhood that's a block or two away. And that's what the opponents were complaining about. And I think that I tend to agree with Ms. Meyer that it might be prudent for you as the applicant to meet with some of the people that were here complaining or in opposition to your application today. Because if you don't, it may be that your application may not be approved. So it might be helpful to at least continue this hearing. We've heard testimony from you and from three people before we decide. I would agree with Ms. Meyer, it might be in your interest to have this continued for 30 days, to give you a chance to talk with some of the neighbors and perhaps get somebody on board to support you, to allay some of the fears and complaints of some of the people that have testified today. And if you come back before us in a month, you might have a better chance of success before us. And I would add that, you know, it seems as though that the music, although to me it looks very clearly that it's projecting straight into South Limestone and across the street to UK, there's obviously this back patio or there's something that's sending the music the other way. If there's any sound reduction type of stuff that could be used to limit what's happening behind, since we really don't have anything in front, although, you know, I don't know how music or sound travels. It could be echoing off the new dorms and sending it back that way, so I don't know. But, you know, maybe there's some options, some middle ground on that back patio. The back covered patio, there's no speakers back there. Okay. And it is covered as well. And that's actually one of the more quiet areas of the bar, I mean, relatively. So, I'd be very surprised if that sound was coming from the covered patio was causing the issue. So, probably from the corridor between the... If it's somehow coming between that gap there, that's why you can hear it. I'm not denying that you might be able to hear it other places than at our bar. My argument is that it's not causing a nuisance as far as the volume outside of our bar. I don't believe that it's excessively loud. My recommendation would be, I'm getting the feeling this might get postponed, but over the course of the next 30 days, if you do have meetings with those behind you, that maybe that somehow gets addressed if you can do anything to kind of mitigate that in any certain way. I'm not saying there is, and I'm not saying you come to a common ground, but that would be a starting point if I were you. And I think more important, maybe if we do postpone, I think it would be a very good idea to do some research and see what the sound is on upper. I mean, have the DJ or the band playing at whatever volume you think is appropriate and see what the sound is over there. Go over there and see. Because I don't think you all know, and you're not doing it deliberately, but at the same time, I think it would be good to know what you're actually hearing over there. Okay. And I think that would be just very valuable to all of us. Yes, and I agree. I think it would be relevant to what we eventually decide on this case. So I would highly recommend continuing this hearing. We can't postpone it because we've already begun testimony, but we can continue it under our guidelines for 30 days or so. So I'm getting the census or the sense of the board that a continuance might be recommended. And the question is, to comply with Mr. Clark's suggestion, how much time do you want? We meet monthly. Our next meeting will be in September. So 30 days enough, 60 days more. The sooner the better for me. The sooner the better. The sooner the better. In that case, I'll entertain a motion to post to, I'm sorry, to continue this case for 30 days if it's the board's. I have a question. Yes, ma'am. Are we looking at this with amplified entertainment or not? As I understood Mr. Mark's explanation, we are considering amplified music. Okay. Yes. So this needs to be changed in the way it's written. And I think I did hear someone say that Friday and Saturday nights might not be too bad, but not Thursday. That might be another consideration. Well, it's certainly something to consider. There may be several things to consider in the next 30 days. if we do continue this case and put it on the September docket. So any other questions? Yes, Mr. Marks. Since this is an open enforcement case, I would hope there might be some discussion about over the next 30 days, what the expectations are about they can continue as is, or are they going to voluntarily agree to scale back things over that end time? Let me mention that in the meantime, we have, since this started, we have ceased to play projecting onto the patio. So we only play projecting inside. And I think that'll be an important consideration in the next 30 days. Whoever chooses to, you or the people in opposition, can have a chance to gather proof or to bring before us new evidence or new things for us to consider. Mr. Clark's suggestion about measuring the sound might be helpful to one side or the other, and we don't know who. I'm sure it would be very helpful. But that kind of homework to you all might be worth considering. and as another reason for continuing this case to the September docket. So I will entertain a motion. I'll make that motion. Motion to continue to the September. I will move to continue PLN BOA 17-57 Bears and Dogs for further consideration at the next meeting, which is september september september 29th sorry september 29th so move there's a motion do i have a second second uh mr clark's motion miss meyer's second all in favor say aye aye it's unanimous we'll postpone until a september docket good luck to all parties and we'll see you next month thank you Thank you. Are there any other matters to come before the Board of Adjustment? Anything from the staff? Support anything from the Board? Our next meeting is September 29th. Hearing nothing further, the Board is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.