Started construction in 1935, took two years to complete, so the cost of about a million dollars and was completed in 1937. It's got such a rich history. You know, the 12th district is 70% of the land mass and there's so many cool places, but this is one of my very, very favorites. I just think that it's so special when folks come out here and they see it and they're like, wow, I didn't even know this was here. So when Pansy moved here, she increased her saddlebred. From what I understand, she was the premier saddlebred stables in the world. And many of the horses today in the saddlebred are heirs of Pansy, the horses that were out here at Spindletop. The bloodlines are still very prominent. There was Chief of Spindletop and Bo Peavine and Roxy Highland, which our dining room is actually named after Roxy Highland. So, yeah, she dominated the industry for a number of years and actually forced herself out of the show ring. She had a personal policy that she wouldn't compete against horses bred on her farm. So she ultimately forced herself out of the show ring and moved back to Texas in 1955. We'll start the call of order for the Board of Adjustment meeting on July 9, 2018. Mr. Glover is present. he has stepped out to get his reading glasses and we'll be back momentarily so I will go ahead and the first order of business will be the approval of the minutes from our June 11th meeting those have been submitted to us by staff has everyone had an opportunity to review those and do you want any discussion hearing none then I will entertain a motion I move we approve the minutes from last month. Eloquent as always, Mr. Needham. Thank you. Do I have a second? A second. Thank you. All those in favor, please register your votes. Motion passes. I will pass down these to you, Ms. Whitman, to counter. the next item i have forgotten my notes i have to go by memory on this is um some housekeeping items number one if you would please turn your cell phone on silent or turn it off so it doesn't ring during the hearing i will sound the agenda and go through each case generally we will have uncontested cases heard first in the order that they're called and cases in which we need a hearing we'll have those heard last. If you want to testify today if you would please stand so I can swear you in. So if you plan to come to the podium today to speak on anything please stand, raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Alright, perfect. And if for some reason you decide to come up and speak and you have not been sworn in, just remind me and I will square you in at the podium. So I'm going to go ahead and call the cases. The first case we're going to go through are the variance appeals, PLM VOA 18-42, Ethington and Ethington, the applicant present. Thank you, sir. We will have a hearing on this one since the plans have been changed, so I will have you put it at the end of the docket after we go through uncontested items. The next item is PLM VOA 18-45, Adam Christot. Christo, applicant is present. Do we have anyone here that wants to speak on that matter today? Okay. Well, you'll be the first case we call when we hear cases. Next item is PLMBOA 18-46, Michelle Moorhead, applicant present. Thank you. Anyone here to speak on this matter? The staff would like to request a postponement of this case. We received a new site plan last week that has some pretty significant changes. I think the applicant would still like to be heard today, but we do have some concerns about the site plan changing from what was sent out in the notification. Okay. Well, I'll mark this one down as to be heard, and then we will discuss that at that time. The next item is PLN BOA 18-47, Chauncey Morris and Selena Magana. All right. is anyone here to discuss this today? okay we'll have you on the uncontested next item is PLN BOA 18-49 Lexington Remodeling Services is the applicant present? is anyone here in opposition? or want to speak on this matter? alright then we have a conditional use appeal PLN BOA 18-48 Samir Gandhi applicant present all right anyone here to speak on that all right so we will have that as to be heard oh yeah all right Okay, so for the items in which we have one person here in opposition, is there any benefit for you guys to step in the hallway and discuss the plans with her? Nope? She says no? Okay then. That's not an issue, so we will have that one. So what I'm going to bring up first is the postponement case, in that usually we have postponements and withdrawals before we have our other cases, so I will call up the case of PLM BOA 18-46 Michelle Moorhead related to 2120 Island Drive. Sir, please introduce yourself for the record. Jack Stewart, Stewart Architecture. Mr. Stewart, were you sworn in? Yes. Okay. The staff has requested a postponement due to the plans changing. Is your clients want to postpone or do they want to be heard? I think if we could, the condition that we are going to propose today that differs, it would still fit into the qualifications of the submittal we've made. So it's just an adjustment of what was submitted for today and the same permission that we have asked for for today would apply to the revised design. Autumn, how drastic was this? We have it to look at if you'd like to see it. How drastic was this? I want to be honest with you, Mr. Stewart, and we've had this issue this year and several times. I am becoming more, I guess, opposed to design changes on the fly in which staff and the board does not have advance notice of design change for us to look at in advance. And so my inclination has been postponement on those cases, but I'll let staff give me their two cents. In this case, the requested variance would be the same in language, but there is a difference in the addition would extend over an additional 12 feet that it did not in the existing site plan, so that addition is considerably larger. It's a setback variant, so the setback would be shorter for a wider distance than what was shown. There's also a significant difference in the paving. The original proposal showed considerably less pavement than what exists now, and the new proposal shows a little bit more paving. So those were the concerns that we had, that there were changes that made the variance a little bit different. Could we throw that new plan up on? Do you want to see the new one or the original? Well, I guess let's start with the original so we can see the change. Actually, we can pull up the original on our screen. Can we just put the new one on? Working on it. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and get some more of the food. the applicants original site plan the driveway was going to go to the side and the garage doors would be on the side of the property instead of facing the street currently the garage faces the street in this proposal the garage is expanded and faces the street so you'll see that the the new addition extends to basically the end of the house that's an additional twelve and a half feet from what the initial site plan shows and the paving is pretty similar to what exists now except for where you see that little arrow closest to the addition that is new paving in the original site plan that was submitted we were removing a large chunk of that pavement and paving up the side instead the first proposal shows about 1100 square feet of paving this one shows about 1375 square feet well mr stewart this appears to be a substantial change from the original application I would be inclined to postpone until next month, but I'll let my colleagues weigh in if they choose. Because staff hasn't had time to thoroughly vet this, I'm in agreement with Mr. Crowe. Well, if nobody is in disagreement with me, which is a change, I will entertain a motion for postponement. I move we postpone. Our next meeting is on August 13, 2008, so the motion is to postpone this application until that time. We have a first. Do I have a second? I have a second. If you are in favor, please vote. So we'll have this case brought back up next month. Yes. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Mr. Stewart, sorry, we will need to have a re-notice to show the new site plan for the neighbors. Right, yeah. Okay, okay. Thank you. Sorry. The next item to be heard that did not have opposition is PLM BOA 18-45. Adam Crustos, request for a variance at 1820 Nicholsville Road. Applicant, please come forward. And we do have one letter. Opposition or? Okay. Well, sir, please state your name for the record. Adam Crustos. Okay. Okay. Okay. Well, let's give a minute while we look at this letter in opposition. In the meantime, I'll ask you a couple questions. The staff has recommended approval of your application based upon three conditions. Have you read those conditions? I have not. Okay. We'll take a second and look at your report. There are three conditions, but you will need to agree to abide by those as part of this process. okay so you're in agreement to abide by those conditions yes all right thank you sir well if you want to have a seat right here in the front row we'll look at this letter and then we'll Okay, forward. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. sir you come back up let's see it appears that I'm assuming you must be the engineer or the architect contractor contractor okay so just to clarify you've got the authority on behalf of your clients to agree to the conditions yes okay perfect there was one letter in opposition and it spoke to a lack of green space that was really the the gist of the letter does anyone from the board have any questions for this applicant i have a question um is the uh mcdonald is one way or two way right there or is that a it's divided street okay and that's the two car well it's a one car garage with two gables that sit behind it yeah okay and then just if you could just give me a brief overview of how that addition might look i mean the curved roof and the and that um it's a nice it's got a nice look that house and if that's going to get boxed in in a way that so currently there is an addition already on the back of the house i'm not sure at what point that was put in we're basically removing that addition and extending that hilltonia side elevation of the house we're just going to extend that with the same brick and the same stonework and and put this similar flat roof that's on there now on that back portion so it's basically just a one story you can barely see it from the road with the privacy fence anyway but we are going to maintain that brick and that stone facade so Hopefully it'll look like it's always been sitting there. So that flat roof will come around, and then it'll turn the corner and come into that little curved roof addition. It doesn't even meet the curved roof addition, so it actually sits below that elevation point. It sits below it, okay. Mm-hmm. Is there currently a privacy fence there? I don't see it on the Google Maps. Yes. Yeah, this is the... Yeah. Okay. Do you have a picture of that? Which part? The privacy bins. No. I have the same thing. I'm pretty familiar with this property. Hopefully, other than some trucks being there for a little bit, nobody will notice a difference. Looks like you need a sidewalk in the Google Maps version. Okay. That's all my questions. Any additional questions, comments? Is the board ready to move forward with a vote? Okay, please. Mr. Chair, I recommend approval for PLNBOA 18-45, Adam Crusade, requesting a variance to reduce the required side street side yard from 30 to 13 feet in order to expand the existing residence in a two-family residential zone within the defined infill and re-development area, 1820 Nicholasville Road, based on the staff's recommendation and the three conditions expressed. So move. Thank you, Mr. Clark. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Needham. application has been approved good luck with your project thank you Chad you're gonna vote the next item on the docket is PLN BOA 18-47 Chauncey Morris and Selena Magana at 1824 mcdonald avenue's applicant present come on up ma'am please state your name for the record selena magana and were you sworn in with everybody else i was thank you and um the staff has recommended approval based upon two conditions have you seen those in the report i have not no okay the first one is the addition shall be constructed in accordance with the submitted site plan and application materials with the understanding that the existing driveway may be relocated to the opposite side of the home. The second one is all necessary permits and or approvals shall be obtained from the divisions of planning and building inspection. Are you in agreement with those? Yes. Perfect. Does anyone from the board have any questions or comments for this applicant? Well, hearing none, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that we approve PLN BOA-1847 Chauncey Morris and Selena Magana's request for a variance to reduce the required side yard setback from 8 feet to 5 feet in order to expand the existing residence in a single-family residential zone within the defined infill and redevelopment area at 1824 MacDonald Avenue for reasons recommended by staff and subject to the two conditions outlined by staff. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Glover. has been approved good luck with your project thank you you're welcome the next item on our agenda is plnboa 18-49 lexan remodeling services as application for a variance at one i mean a 517 becoming drive please come to the podium and put your name on the record chris shank gerald patterson and i'm presuming you guys are the contractors and you have the authority of the homeowner to bind them today okay um staff has recommended approval um they've recommended that approval based upon three conditions um have you and your client had an opportunity to look at those conditions yes and are they in agreement with those yes okay does anyone here have any questions for the applicant well hearing none I will entertain a motion I move we approve I move we approved PLN BOA 18-49 Lexington Remodeling Services requests for a variance to reduce the required setback for a covered projection from four feet to three feet in order to construct an attached carport in a single-family residential R1C zone at 517 McCubbin Drive based on staffs three reasons and subject to their three conditions thank you mr. Needham do I have a second Ms. Whitman seconds the motion. All those in favor please register your votes. Application is approved good luck with the project. Thank you. And that brings us to PLM BOA 18-42 Evington and Evington. Come on up sir. Now, after I ranted and raved about reviewing things on the fly, we got a redesign today from you guys. But it looks like it was, when was this submitted, Autumn? And really, this is going to be directed to staff. We received this, the site plan is dated July 3rd, but we saw it a little bit ahead of that. In this situation, they're requesting less of a variance than what they were initially requesting, so that's a bit of a difference between that and the reason we recommended postponement for the other one. I understand that, but I'm curious why the board wasn't emailed. Yeah, we had already sent you the same thing from last month, and we were working on our revised findings up until the last minute. Okay. All right. Well, let's put the new plan up on the screen. All right. I forget if I asked you to put your name on the record. My name is Matt Carter. I'm with Vision Engineering. Mr. Carter, what I recommend is if there should be a pointer up there. If you want to walk through the design changes that you guys have made from last month's plan, and for those who were not here last month, this plan was before us, you should have a package with the original plan, and staff has passed out this new plan for us to look at. so we can talk through the changes. Okay. Can you hear me? What I've done on this one was the buildings right here, originally they were back actually 57 feet further back, so I've pushed them towards Harrodsburg Road, 57 feet. I've also put I think before we just had a driving aisle, no parking behind the building so I've moved the buildings forward took half the parking that was up here roughly and put it behind the building so now our building has parking on all sides we had a dumpster right here I've moved did over to this location. Another big change was this drive-anile right here did not line up with the patio area right here. So what I did was I've added one of, I took one of these units off this row of buildings, added it to here, shift it down. Now we've got public access that runs up into the neighborhood as well. So it's easier for the public to get in to this kind of central gathering area right here. We've got a lot of... And Matt, will that be pedestrian-only access or... I can't... This right here is actually the drive for these townhome units here. So it'll be vehicles and pedestrians. Now when you get up into the subdivision, it's just a sidewalk. Then we've got a crossing right here, six-foot sidewalk, crosswalk, and then you're into the patio area. We also have access right here and another one coming from the neighborhood back in here with the sidewalk coming down and in here. And they can also access from a sidewalk in this direction coming from where the church is down here. So the townhouses are all going to face Harrisburg Road, it looks like from your map, with rear garages. Is that the plan? That's correct. Okay. And if you would like to see, I have a rendering of the, actually both the townhomes and the commercial building. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. I think so. Unlike the city council, I do like looking at renderings. They don't like them. It's probably one of Tracy's rules. Maybe show partial of it, but this is the townhomes. So, and as you said, they're rear entry. So there will be parallel parking along the front for these and a sidewalk along the front. and then the commercial building the architect is doing both the townhomes and the commercial buildings and he wanted the commercial buildings to have a similar look to the townhome so I can put that up now similar similar type roof and then also he made where the front and the back of the building like the townhomes I think the this this one here is the back so this is what the town homes will be looking at and then this is what will be seen from harrisburg road so it's attractive building both from the front and the back thing i know you're going to get questioned on at some point is the screening um on harrisburg road the screening along harrodsburg road there there's actually a corridor plan that dictates i believe the actual plan is for man of war but when we went through the Planning Commission with this, they asked that we match what they're doing on Manowar. So there is a significant amount of larger trees and a mix of shrubs that will be put in along Harrodsburg Road. And another place I wanted to point out, on the back here, originally we had less than 10 feet of landscaping in there. It was pretty narrow. And from here to here, it averages 37 feet wide. So we can do significant screening between the neighborhood and the commercial buildings. And so what we've envisioned is putting in a landscape berm where we can and heavy landscaping. What I've shown there is just, I mean, that's not exactly what we're going to do. We'll have a landscape architect go in and do something nice, but I just wanted to illustrate that there is room for large trees, shrubs, and there's plenty of landscaping around it. We're not going to be crowding it, so it'll look nice. Well, that's kind of my issue, what one of my issues with this is is landscaping because I feel that the character of the neighborhood has been significantly and and will be significantly altered by this development and when I read the staff report and properties to the north are referenced I'm thinking of the one that's at the retail center that's at the corner of Harrodsburg Road and Man a war that parking lot is on a rise so that's not at eye level you don't you know i don't you know it's not it doesn't stick out to me and palomar center is significantly screened and by a wall at the end so and as i drove in today yes it's screened by its trees and uh shrubbery and for me the fact that this this landscape has been significantly altered and a lot of canopy tree canopy has been taken out I'd really like to see a lot of tree canopy put back immediately in in the form of larger trees and not you know not twigs that are often you know set in a parking lot that don't grow into anything for me yeah I you know when I'm going to a parking lot the first thing in a when it's hot out i look for a tree to park under and and you know you're putting in a lot of effort to make this aesthetically you know to look you know have it look nice and part of that for me is landscaping and having trees and cover that you know it draws people in um so that's i'm glad to hear that you're you know thinking in terms of that but i'd like to see larger trees and you know have something that looks like it's been there when it's it's planted immediately you know not have it be something in 10 years i'd like to see it something in five years you know that looks like it's been there for a while ms jones how would um we're here on on just the setback issue I'm presuming this plan is before the Planning Commission on a larger development plan overall, and they would have essentially the jurisdiction as to landscaping, and I do know that, generally speaking, even with screening, the tree only has to be a certain size within a certain amount of years. They've looked at this development plan. I don't know if – are you going to have to go back, Matt, or do you know? No, we will not be going back. We're just waiting, I guess, the recommendation of this board for the variances, but it will not go back to the Planning Commission unless it's amended again for some reason. Because the Planning Commission, they saw it twice, I think, and then they did make some of the very same comments that you're making about the trees because of the trees that were removed. So, I mean, I think it's probably been addressed in their purview, and you're really just looking at the variants at this point. So you're saying that we can't put a condition on our variants? we can't put a condition that has make some statement to the to to what we're asking for in the way of screening I mean you can you can ask for a condition in terms of the screening but I don't think you want to get and I don't remember exactly how the Planning Commission worded it but I don't think We want to get crossways with what they said in terms of being even more restrictive. But I do think their plan was approved based on this board approving the variance. So they're waiting on, you know, that's what they, but they did talk about trees. And I don't know, Matt, if you can remember. I just remember they talked about putting trees back because of the trees that were removed, but I don't remember the specific conditions. Yeah, the trees that were along Herdsburg Road, between our Frontage Road and Herdsburg Road, those specifically had to be of a certain size, class of tree. But you are correct that they don't necessarily go in giant trees. but they are of the species that will get large, you know, like oaks. And we can put in, you know, like a three-inch caliper tree, which is probably a little bigger than you would normally put, but it's hard to get a tree much bigger than that that you can transplant. So, but I would anticipate that along Harrodsburg Road, we put in fairly significant trees in size just to make kind of a big impact when we start the development. So internally, they really didn't have any, you know, the ordinance covers tree canopies and how many trees you have to have. And the plan basically just stated that we have to meet that ordinance. But they were very specific on the along Harrodsburg Road. So. i think miss meyer's concerns are valid i don't know what did the staff have any concern about greenery shrubbery trees or anything like that i noticed that there's nothing nothing planned no no greenery planned between the residential portion and the commercial parking area did that give you all any pause or concern As Matt said, a lot of that is covered by the ordinance, and they were not asking for any variances from that or anything, so it would have to meet the requirements of the ordinance for the vehicular use areas between zones. I can add a little to that. This area right here, there's an existing large trees stand, and the plan did cover that area that those are to remain. And they're just a mix of species, but a lot of them are pines. There's some large oaks. On the adjoining tract, most of those are staying. But certainly along that property line, we have not removed any of those trees. What property line are you referring to, please? Right here. Oh, okay. And then along the back, I mean, it's outside of the scope of this, but along the back where the existing subdivision is, there's a row of pine trees, mature pine trees. All of those are staying as well. Do you have any internal greenery, shrubbery trees planned? We don't have a plan at this point, but we will. I mean, in order to get our permits, all these areas like in here, in here, probably here, here, all this will be heavily screened. All these will have plantings. And I will say the ordinance is pretty significant on the amount of trees you have to have. There's a canopy requirement you have to meet. and the credit they give us for the trees we planned is pretty small. So that means ultimately there's going to be a lot of trees. You're right, it'll take a few years for them to get significant in size, but we are planting the species that will get large, like an oak. Well, unfortunately, Matt, you're in the unenvious position of several of the members are quite aware of the trees that were removed from this property during the grading process. And so that is a concern of kind of the willingness of the developer to carry through with properly putting in screening. And I've heard the reasons of how it occurred. you know whether i feel that that's a valid reason or put much veracity into it is beside the point but i think that's part of some members of the board's issue is that there was there were a number of large trees in this property that were improperly removed during the grading process yes you're correct tell us back to the conversation about conditioning about this and you don't want i understand that you don't want us to get crossways with you know with the planning commission but by the same token you know does the planning commission take into consideration the discussion that we're having right now about this about these trees um yeah i think they did they had some of the same concerns when the trees were removed um during the grading process that you all are expressing right now Additionally, in terms of the, they did specify, I think, as Matt said, by species. So they were trying to accommodate the larger trees. Now, I don't think that they limited that by the caliper size because I guess there's some concern as to how many of those species you'd be able to obtain if you make the caliper size, you know, lock in that. in terms of what you don't see on here that Mr. Glover was asking about in terms of the internal greenery, they'll come back through the process, not to the Planning Commission, but to get those sign-offs in order to go forward. And they'll have to have a landscaping plan at that time that the staff will sign off on that meets all of the requirements in our ordinance. for there's a vehicle use screening provision in the ordinance that if you are doing parking and it's between different types of zones which will happen here when you go from the commercial to the residential they're required to meet certain standards and they'll have to do that or else the staff won't sign off which means they can't get all the rest of their permits so there will be there will be some more screening in between the zones that will show up at a later time and then as far as what's in the front I mean it's up to you all if you want to try to in addition to the species that the Planning Commission addressed if you wanted to try to limit or put forth a caliper size I just I don't know how I'm not sure how easy or not easy that'll be in terms of getting those types of trees in place but the Planning Commission did wrestle with this issue and they uh you know they weren't in all fairness they weren't very happy about it when it came to them because of the of what had happened so they did talk about it for a pretty lengthy time and i think if i'm not mistaken that since they're trying to use the same kind of provisions that were on man of war that there will also be and i'm if i'm wrong about this matt you can tell me but they're also going to be like a plank horse type fence as well Yes, that's correct, along Harrodsburg Road. What about the, Ms. Meyer mentioned, and what about the elevation from Harrodsburg Road into the center? Is it going to be a level? Is there going to be one higher or lower than the other? What's the plan? Well, the grade on Harrodsburg Road, this would be the high side of the plan. This would be the low. It's dropping this way. And the way the site's going to be developed, it's going to be similar. These buildings here, well, the drive right here is basically level with Harrodsburg Road. Then this will slope up. The building will have steps in it, meaning the whole building won't be on one pad elevation. It may be on two or three. I think she's more concerned with the parking than the buildings necessarily. Is that my understanding? Well, I've observed since this has been excavated that in front of the church, I hadn't noticed it before, there's a berm that does help. You see the church, but the parking is hidden by that. It's a low berm, and it's got mature trees in it. And so to me, that's pleasing that it's there. And I know you've got a shopping center, and it has to be seen and all of that. But still, you know, to me, you want it aesthetically pleasing. You know, you don't want to look at just parking. And, you know, you make it so that you're inviting. People are drawn into it. Right. And it's what can you do to accomplish that. And, you know, because to me, you know, yes, and I appreciate that you've pulled it forward and that you've lessened the parking in the front. But for it, it doesn't seem to happen. Okay. I will add there is berms along Harrodsburg Road. On this end, the berm would be the highest. And when I say berm, we're not building up the berm. We're cutting down the existing ground, and there's utilities buried in here, and because of those, we're not able to remove that material, so we're creating a berm to cover water and gas lines, and the parking will be, with the exception at the entrance, it will have berms. So probably two to three feet high berm, the entire length of the development. Tracy, what's the development plan for the fountains? How is that parking? That's going to be elevated. You're going to see that from the road, I guess, is my question, because I know the current shopping center where the Jets Pizza is located is pretty far back, and the parking is pretty well hidden from Harrisburg Road. Well, it's not going to look like that. At this point, they only have a preliminary development plan because they've been through the zone change process, and the zone change requires that you have a preliminary, but obviously nobody's going to go to the expense of drawing up a final that you build off of until you know you can get the zone change. So what they're showing us on the preliminary plan could still change. They still have to come back to the planning commission with their final development plan. However, on the preliminary, there is going to be parking that I think you would be able to see from Harrodsburg Road. You know, their site is going from the corner of Manowar and Harrodsburg Road through the site where Murray's Restaurant used to be and stopping at the, I think it's an American Legion post or I'm not sure. but it's some kind of a house that's there. And right now that they don't have any, that's still owned by whoever owns that property. So that's where it'll stop. So there's also some grade changes in there as well. And I expect that when they come back with a final, they're going to have addressed those as best they can. But yeah, there will be some, the way that their preliminary shows right now, they will be parking and you probably will see at least part of it depending on the grade from the road. I have had a chance to review that grading plan for that project and on the Harrodsburg Road end, kind of in front of where Murray's was, it's going to be, it's proposed to be about 11 feet higher than Harrodsburg Road. And then as you get up to the intersection with Manowar, the grades start dropping, and they're probably four to five feet above the road. And then as you go around Manowar, heading towards Palomar, it probably averages about four feet higher than the road. And what will your elevation grade be? Our buildings will actually, they'll probably sit really close to the same grade as the road, but there will be a berm between the frontage road and the right-of-way. There will be a slight berm in there, two to three feet high. so how high would it need to be to screen most of the vehicles in the parking lot well usually a three I mean parking lights are typically two and a half to three feet off the ground I mean that maybe not even that high probably two feet but then when you can the berm with the hedges and and the trees it's pretty significant screening so a three-foot berm would definitely screen a a parking lot said yours was gonna be two to three feet yeah some places even higher as you go nor as you go this direction the berm gets probably up to six feet high so all this area right in here will be all like two to three feet high and the trees are in front of the berm? They'll be all over the berm because they won't be in one row. They'll be kind of zigzag through there so some will be in front, some on top, some behind it, as well as groups of shrubs and there'll be small trees, big trees there's a there's a quite a mix of trees they're not all big trees but i know that the zoning requires a certain number of trees but we've learned recently that developers are using the columnar trees to provide more of a sight line to the to the businesses and i just wondered is there any plan for for the columnar trees which are tall but skinny i know the trees you're talking of and i don't think we'll use those on this project i know the developer that wants that likes to use those but uh those really aren't that common um there's one specific developer that's his tree he loves that tree and uh um it's a sweet gum and uh i don't think we'll be using those but you know the problem that i have is is that we don't have you know you we're having this conversation but we don't have any teeth in this i mean we're having the conversation but what what what our conversation is and versus what what actually happens maybe just totally different and again you know a berm yes i'd like to see a berm and i'd like to see the berm be of such a height that it does screen from the road and do we want to put a minnow do we want to put a height on the berm i'd like to see that because you know i'm hearing from from legal that you know i don't want to get into cross ties with with um with the planning commission but by the same token you know i'd like to see uh some native trees put in there that are going to grow and grow quickly and as opposed to some trees that aren't native and and if you look around this town at parking lots you'll see i see a lot of trees that are dead and dying that have been planted and they're not thriving because they're they're not of their variety that either the soil is poor and it's been scraped off and then they're dumped into clay and then they don't have a chance and so then they get replanted and we have to start all over again and we're waiting years for something that looks like you know like it provides canopy and it provides shade you know yes it's sitting it's it's there but it's not really doing anything other than just you know it's just there and it It doesn't thrive and doesn't grow. And so, you know, the whole point is that they, you know, they soften this hardscape. And so, you know, I'm a little frustrated because we're having this conversation, but then what kind of teeth do we have here? And so what can we do? What can this board do? is what I'd like to know. Well, I think we're, I mean, they're asking for a conditional use, I mean, a variance, and we can put conditions on our approval, but once the variance has been approved, it's approved, but we can condition our approval. You can condition your approval, yes. And I think given, you know, that this setback is supposed to be a certain. So. I don't see any reason why we can't put a condition on it. And if we're approving a variance, the variance is for a reason. And the original measurements are there for a reason. And if we're changing that, then we ought to be able to change the conditions. I have a question, and I guess it's for Tracy. So are we able to put a condition that's stricter than what the ordinance already says? Because I'm agreeing, you know, in concept with what we're saying. But if there's the ordinance and the requirement in place already. I gather from Ms. Meyer what she's potentially looking for is maybe two conditions, one being the berm needs to be a certain height, and the second one being that the landscaping needs to be of a certain type. Well, I'm looking at this section about variances in the zoning ordinance, and basically what it says is that the board has the power to hear and decide applications for variances and those are defined as departures from dimensional terms of the zoning variance pertaining to height, width, or location of structures, and the size of yards and open spaces. So, I mean, basically that is what a variance is. And you all are asking, you know, they are asking to change, obviously, to vary from those dimensional requirements. So while I understand what you're saying, I mean, I think you can condition that to some degree, but it's not a conditional use. And also I would be cautious about venturing too far away from heights, widths, locations of structure, size of yards, and open spaces in what you do so that you're not going outside what the powers in the ordinance are for variances. But wouldn't a berm be open space? I think it would. Okay. I understood earlier in this conversation that the ordinance that addresses internal property vegetation, that the ordinance covers that. In other words, somebody's already had this conversation and put that kind of language in the ordinance so that it addresses screening on the internal section of the property. Did I hear that right? Well, yes, that's correct. but I think when we're talking about that, we're talking about what is required in terms of the tree canopy on the site, which they can meet by if they do, you know, islands within the parking areas and that kind of thing. We're also talking about vehicular screening areas where there's parking adjacent to a zone that is not the same zone. in other words, like lot, well, I can't read them, they're too small, but the lot on the end that's further set back because it looks like a gas station, you know, that's zoned the same currently as the rest of what we're looking at here. So you wouldn't have to have necessarily vehicular screening between those two, but the lot, which will be to the north that you're not seeing on this, or these townhouses behind are a different zone. So they're going to require, under our ordinance, vehicle screening because you're changing from zone to zone. But I don't know that those things are going to address what you're talking about on Harrodsburg Road because that's on the front of the development. In terms of what was addressed, how that's addressed at the Planning Commission, they say they put a note on the development plan whether it's preliminary or final that it has to meet with those requirements and they cite to the chapter of the zoning ordinance that apply to each different development in terms of how many different zones do they have or that kind of thing or what zones are they adjacent to and that they address it that way. So that's on the development plan, and to meet with that ordinance, that goes back to the staff for a sign-off. In terms of the trees and the things that the Planning Commission, the conditions that they put on the development plan, those are also notes on the development plan, and those were, as best I recall, the types of trees, and possibly, I can't remember the number, but it wasn't size, was just the types of trees and the fence and those type of things that had to go along Harrodsburg Road. So those would also be noted on the plan. I don't recall, but I could be wrong if there was a notation about a berm or a berm height. That may just have been built into the plan as necessary to address the grade changes and the utility easements along the along there so i don't think there was a specific condition about berms no and the and the uh tree size it was noted as tree class which is basically dictates the size so but they didn't get into specific calipers or anything like that Well, I've got a question. You know, on our plan, down at the bottom left corner, we've got site statistics, and we've got lot two and lot three. We've got interior landscaping regs regulation for each lot, and then we've got interior landscaping proposed. So what's interior? is it is it that's what's what's considered is that part of is that just interior meaning i can answer that um the way you determine there's there's two types of landscaping there's perimeter and interior perimeter is uh screening a parking lot from an adjoining property so perimeters are along the property lines. Interior, the way it's calculated is you take all of your paved area and you multiply that times 5%, and you have to have that much landscaping to offset the parking. And then they have rules on how you can apply that landscaping. It can't be over a certain size island. It can't be under a certain size and there's a certain spacing you can't like have it all loaded in one area and have none in another so i believe you can't go more than 12 parking spaces without having an island there are exceptions but in general that's the way you interpret it mr carter i have i have a question that's a little bit off the subject that we've been been talking about but it relates to elevation i think on the new plan i noticed that the retention basin or the detent is it detention or retention uh detention and that means underground water storage detention is temporary retention is a permanent pool okay and the plan it's a small print on my copy but it says detention basin and it looks like it's in the area between the uh between the buildings and the residential areas so that sounds like that's going to be the low point of the property. Is that correct? It'll be not necessarily, but what we'll do is we'll have underground under the pavement. We'll pipe it to those areas so the detention will be the low point, but it's not necessarily the parking lot. I mean, the building will be higher than the parking lot just so water drains away from it, but it's not always necessarily the low portion of the property. Okay, thanks. I just have a comment. I'm reminded of, and this is off subject, off the trees, but I'm looking at where the dumpster is, and I'm reminded of a case that we had recently. I think it was Transylvania University, and they were increasing their dormitories. And there was a woman who lived in the neighborhood who was really bothered by, you know, the garbage removal. And how many, how close is this dumpster going to be to the townhomes? um i'm just i you know this is just is just off subject but you know it's um i'm looking at that and thinking how close is that yeah it's i mean i don't have a scale but it's i would estimate 50 to 60 feet so i don't know i i you know how i i'm just it's just an observation and and i don't You know, if that's significant noise, I don't know. There is. I mean, there's screening requirements, but a dumpster can be within five feet of a property line, you know, backing up to a neighborhood. Typically, when that happens, they ask for a lot more screening than you would normally do. Well, I would ask the board, we've asked Mr. Carter a number of questions. If any members would like to see a condition other than what's set forth on the revised findings and conditions, now is your chance to speak up. I would like to kind of bring this hearing to an end. So we could easily take a recess if need be so that that person could talk with legal to come up with something on staff. I'd like to do all right in that case we will take a 10 minute recess I will remind the board don't congregate together too much what's our number Tracy for a quorum four so don't get a pack of four while you talk with legal thank you we're adjourned for 10 minutes Welcome back to the Board of Adjustment meeting on July 9th. I'd like to thank everyone for their patience. We have had some discussions with the applicant, and we have put up on the screen which would be a fifth condition for approval related to a berm, and then also an illustration of what generally our understanding of what it would look like, knowing that there would be some give or take as it goes, not give or take, as it grades and slopes, it may not be exact as what's shown here. And Mr. Carter, is your client agreeable to this fifth condition? We are. Oh. Thank you, Mr. Carter. He said they are in agreement. Ms. Whitman has a question. Are we going to say at least a three foot? Yes, it does. It says there will be at least a three foot burn based on average for the length of the frontage on Harrisburg Road. So, yes, that would be the minimum. If he wants to do six feet, Mr. Meyer would be tickled pink. But I presume that won't be in the cards. So, with that being said, does anyone have any questions? And I want to make sure. So, Mr. Carter, just for the record, your client is also agreeable to conditions 1 through 4? Yes. Okay. Thank you. So, with that being said, I will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that we approve PLN BOA 18-42, Ethington and Ethington's request for variances to, one, increase the maximum front yard setback from 20 feet to 215 feet, and for lot two, in a variance from 20 feet to 131 feet on lot three, for reasons for the revised findings and conditions given to us today at this meeting, there are three of them. and subject to the five conditions with the addition of the new condition regarding the berm that's put up on the board with at least an average of a three-foot berm as recommended by staff. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Do I have a second? I second the motion. Ms. Whitman seconds. Please register your votes. Your application has been approved. And I have one last request. Yes, I knew you had one comment. I would request that the Planning Commission, when they revisit this application, that they make note of this lengthy discussion that we've had here today regarding the landscaping for this project. Thank you, Mr. Meyer. Thank you, Mr. Carter. which brings us up to our last case of the day PLM BOA 18-48 Samir Gandhi's request for an extended stay hotel at 209 how do you pronounce this? Ruscio Way, there we go applicant, please come on up state your name for the record good afternoon, I'm Kevin Warner with Carmen landscape architect representing Mr. Gandhi. Thank you sir. I do know that note that there's someone here in opposition we're going to give them a chance to speak in a second but I want to do a couple things. Number one staff has recommended approval that's based upon four conditions have you seen those? Have. And your clients agreeable to abide by those? They are. Okay so I will you want to you're more than welcome you can go ahead and do a short presentation of the application or we can just appear from the interest of expediting things I'm glad to answer any questions that there are okay and respond to any questions from the objector any board member or do you want to wait and we'll address that here okay then sir have a seat in the first row ma'am come on up Hello, if you would please state your name for the record. Yes, I'm Christy Peters. I'm the Executive Director of Morning Point Lexington, representing also the Lantern of Lexington of Morning Point. Is that the adjacent property? Yes, sir. And I'm trying to think here. Is it an Alzheimer's? It is. The Lantern of Lexington is a specific Alzheimer's dementia unit. Okay. Well, ma'am, please let us know your thoughts on this project. We have some concerns, and we do oppose this because we do have such a vulnerable population of seniors living at the Lantern of Lexington with conditions of Alzheimer's and dementia. And then feel that this property would be an annoyance to our residents with the increase of noise level, also the increase of traffic. also the coming of going to people all days and hours of the night so we feel all of these would you know be a hindrance to them and their current living conditions which is at the morning point of Lexington and the lantern Does anyone have any questions for Where are you located? Where are you located? It's a very small proposed lot. This is and it's literally right next door to it. we're at two two two five five and two three three or two five five and two three three it's the two lots right next to it miss peters i'm very familiar with the your property um i was interested to know what the security is with the alzheimer's uh particular uh location That's an excellent question because it is a locked dementia unit, but as the state requires, you do have to have fire exits and those emergency exit doors. So they are alarm doors, of course. They have to be pushed on an alarm, but that does not limit the residents, really, if they hear noise externally or hear things going on out there, to increase their want to get out or efforts to get out. So it is something that we have to constantly monitor and be very aware. of are the rooms on that side of the building yes sir yeah all right thank you I may have some other questions later I think I'm gonna have a question for legal Miss Jones I have a question for you possibly for staff what I recall and the reason I know this is because I had a I was looking into this property at some point in the near future i mean in the recent past um and would this run a file of that monticello subdivision agreement that got put of record when they were developing this whole area has anyone looked into that because i know that you couldn't rezone the property from p1 but is there I don't I haven't looked into that I don't know that it that I can speak to that without looking at that agreement that there were no there was nothing to prohibit this use in on this particular property and in that okay this particular property was not okay the same as all the others in the area and now and I just want to make sure that it wasn't be that hate for us to approve a conditional use in the applicant do something that they would otherwise be prohibited because of that settlement agreement. Okay. I have a question, but for the applicant. Okay. You want to sit down, ma'am, and we'll ping pong back and forth. I guess my question is do we have other similar properties locally and what type of traffic and clients tell? Yes, ma'am. This is an extended-stay hotel, meaning that it's geared toward young professionals or professionals in general who are there for a three-night or a week-long or a few-week-long type of situation where they're working in the area and they're not wanting to rent an apartment, so to speak. But these are people that are working. This is not a leisure hotel where people are on vacation. So there is another extended stay hotel on the other side of their property right now existing. So it's very similar to what they have already on the opposite side of them. And I'll only ask the question because I think that I just wanted to maybe put on record what type of establishment it was Because that is my experience with those extended stays, most common with people relocating in or temporary professionals. This is a name brand State Bridge Hotel. It's an upper-end type of establishment. As I mentioned, it's not geared towards the vacation traveler type person. So if these folks are staying here, the idea is they're working. So they're going to bed, you know, just like the patients at the assisted living might be going to bed, not wanting to be disturbed at night. You could say the same for the folks that are working and staying in an extended stay hotel. So I think there's a lot of similarities. The owner or the developer mentioned to me that although they have an outdoor patio area behind their hotel, it closes at 10 p.m. They don't keep a pool or something open all night that can lead to noise and aggravation for surrounding neighbors. So where is the activity in the establishment? It's hard to tell from this. In other words, if there's traffic here, where would the traffic be in terms of the diagram? for the site plan up people are coming and going is it is the area between this and morning point they'll put up the site plan that you submitted vacant property there we go it's oriented slightly differently than than the so the the assisted living is on this side and ruchio way is out here yeah and then reynolds road is out in front of these buildings so most of your traffic is going to be coming in reynolds road and turning into the parking lot it won't need to travel past the assisted living facility so what's on the back there the back of the building yeah no on your diagram the cut out there what what is that on the back that's the patio that I reference that's the patio right now the patio used well I can I can allow the developer to give you some more details if you'd like that'd be great come on up put your name on the record for us yes hi my name is Samir Gandhi and did were you sworn in earlier okay please raise your right hand yeah do you swear and affirm tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do thank you sir well I just wanted to briefly just talk about the brand that we're going with this brand is a premium brand by IHG you know kind of a hotel group the brands that are sim that are related to this brand are holiday holiday express intercontinental hotel group um stay bridge candlewood so they're elevated brands right behind hilton and marriott so we have the premium brand uh with with uh the stay bridge as the extend state hotel the their lower brand is their candle wood brand so the patio use is just an area for people to kind of gather and relax mostly business people we've seen this in a lot of extended state hotels where there's a space outside the hotel where they can get out of their rooms and just kind of unwind after the day what's the will be the screening around that space this is going to be I guess miss Meyers question and the question is to keep noise volume from leaving the patio and going into the adjacent property is there fencing yeah state your name for the record Sean pan you swear to farm tell the truth the whole truth and it's about the truth I do anyone else want this morning no if I may just make a comment that we do plan on having a tree line around the parameter of the entire hotel property okay typically in we have the same our guests we have the same knee and someone as residents at the morning view we will have a 10 p.m. so-called quiet hour to the entire property so the outdoor patio be closed at 10 p.m. okay if I may ask miss Peter do you have any issue with guests at the home which suite right now as far as noise or traffic we can't well we'll ask her that we'll ask her that question yes well when it comes to noise or traffic issue our own gas we need to take our own gas we have the same oh it's gonna be corporate clientele so go to go to bed 10 o'clock get up at 6 go to work and our parking we will be more concerned about the any of the noise issues from our own parking lot for our for concern of our own guests then our neighbor from 100 feet away so we will take care of our own noise issues and that's even more concerned to ourselves than our neighbors I'm curious have you had conversations with the the people at the lantern about about you know their issues that they have related to this project I mean did you go to the people at the lantern and say you know we you know knowing that you've got a vulnerable community there and and you know what what can you do to to mitigate to lessen the impact that it would have on these folks and I I just think that might be a worthwhile discussion to have that's a that's a great idea thank you any questions for the applicant is the plan for all there between the properties not unless there's a grade issue most likely now there are some potential challenges with the grading on this site there's a fair amount of up and down existing grade so we don't know yet if that's going to be required but it's a potential thing that we may have to add something just in order to make the grading work on this site well you know I'm just I'm a little concerned that the the activity in this building may indeed be a problem with with morning point and and I'll remind you remind the board and the applicant that with Alzheimer's 10 o'clock doesn't mean anything it's all day long and it's all night long and so any activities that might be disturbing would be would be present regardless of the time of day so I am concerned about making sure that we have some division there so that the activities at the State Bridge is not as evident as it might be without the right kind of treatment between the two properties that's my concern thank you any additional questions for the applicant all right if you guys want to have a seat in the first row I think there's some questions for you ma'am come on back up could you just explain for I see that you guys have two facilities yes sir can you pull that back up with our showing our property with the lantern and the ratio campus there so as you can see the lantern is very much right there the building to almost within I don't know the exact grade or footage between the lantern property and the property line but you're looking at between the lantern and if i'm looking at this map correctly you know basically a 40 to 50 foot gap between where their hotel would be and then this property so on the other side there's another lot that's a five acre property that is the pc non-alzheimer's unit and as you can see there is a road a variance road that goes back through that property and it does separate along with that parking lot and large law area there between that personal care which is different than assisted living in kentucky and then that extended it's not an extended stay it's a comfort suites so there is quite a bit and they do have also the green side on that side of the hotel so when And even at the very last room at the end of the property there, all they really see is the pool and then our side yard. They're not really seeing that guests come and go. I know that's an access road than for the dumpsters in the back. So there's quite a bit of space between that property and then just the general personal care facility. Now when you're looking back at the Alzheimer's unit, you're looking again at this grade here at one point is 24 foot from the parking lot to their property line. We are just concerned about the disturbance of the noise, the activity, the safety. Thank you, ma'am. Any questions for the witness? All right. You have a seat. Thank you. Any more discussions from the board? Hearing none, then I will entertain a motion. I recommend we approve PLNBOA 18-48, Samir Gandhi's request for conditional use permit to establish an extended stay hotel in a professional office zone at 209 Rusio Way for the reasons that staff has outlined and recommended and also meeting the four conditions that staff has recommended. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. So we have a second. Any discussion on the motion? I'm, I, well, we've got a motion, and so what I have to say doesn't really regard, doesn't, I'd like to see the applicant and the Lantern have discussions to see if they could maybe come up with some sort of plan that might work for both entities. I know that we're kind of in the middle of this, but maybe my comment isn't well-timed. But I'd like to, before, that's, otherwise I'm not going to vote for this. Ms. Jones, the discussion on the motion, what's the parameters of what we're supposed to discuss? is Ms. Meyer's comment out of order no I don't think it's out of okay I mean you're discussing the motion and the motion is to prove this okay so any of the comments from board members regarding I mean I'll tell you my I'll give you my two cents my two cents is that this is a difficult property it's shaped weird it is restricted you know for professional uses because of a settlement agreement when this whole area was developed. I think that while I understand the concerns, you know, there are only a handful of parking spaces on this back end of the property. Currently, the lantern is surrounded by a picket fence, so, you know, it's not like it's, you know, there's a wall locked down currently on the residence and um you know if it weren't for the the adjacent use i mean i don't think this would be any controversy at all and i understand that the the people that are served by that facility um but at the same time the current property owner has a right to develop their property i just don't i just don't think that given the design and where all the parking is and the dumpster and the entrance and it's all and really this is the back side of the property I would I'm gonna vote for this that's just my two cents well I would like to see some some discussion about how we can how we can separate the two I'm not sure enough discussion has been done there and I I i share the concerns about that and again maybe this is not the time to do it but it seems like to me that there could be greater discussion about how you how you can separate the two and separate the activities it seems important that we do this um i'll vote against this unless there's some some way we can be assured that it's there is going to be some division that that masks the activities of Staybridge from the lantern. Well, along those lines, I would just go back to say we're putting the burden on the person that owns the property that we're discussing here, but, you know, the other company, a morning point, owned a large property, and they did take their property all the way to the edge of their line, and we're not putting any burden on them to maybe you know the building could have been that particular population could have been maybe placed more in the center or in a place because other development could come i mean they had other options at development of course they couldn't foresee what was going to happen but they didn't know they did not own that property so i'm remiss to put all of the burden on the property owner that's before us today and none of the burden on the property owners that built knowing the property is right up there against a piece of land that they don't own. And you have no way to predict what's going to be there. Actually, the public discussions ended. We're in. I'll just give one cent. I think the I see both both sides I think that some type of screening could be figured out that would help mitigate the concerns of Morning Point. And I think the developers you guys are new in. So if you want to take the lead and put something there that might might help. That would be your option to be neighborly. Any additional comments during this discussion? Okay. So let me ask you this, Ms. Jones. We've got a first and a second on the motion to approve. if for some reason we decided not to move forward with this vote how would that procedurally go well you mean you don't want to take if you didn't want to take the vote I mean obviously you can vote it up or down but oh yeah um I think here's my concern is if we you know you never know how the vote's going to go till the vote is cast if we voted down then the applicant will have to substantially change their plan to be re-heard within the next year on this development. And I don't think adding a fence along the lines would be considered a substantial change. So I don't want to necessarily us vote, it could decline, and the applicant can't do anything for a year. I think procedurally, one of the potential no votes could suggest a friendly amendment since there is a motion already on the floor. I think there can be an amendment, and if the person who made the motion is agreeable to that amendment, then it could be added to the motion. If not, then you'd have to vote on the amendment separately and then go back to the motion is one way to deal with it. Or the person that made the motion to amend could withdraw it? Yeah, the person that made the motion could also withdraw the motion at this point. All right. Well, Ms. Carter, I would ask if you wouldn't mind withdrawing your motion at this time. You don't have to, but I just want to talk to the applicant. Yeah, that's what I think. Well, but a minute to what? I meant to say what? Well, I think the major concern... Because right now we've got three people who have concerns with the design. And the concerns seem to revolve around screening between the two pieces of property. Is that right? And so it seems like to me that adding or proposing a fifth condition regarding screening would be the appropriate thing to do to move this along. Doesn't that sound reasonable? That would certainly be allowable, yes. Yeah. So. I will withdraw my current motion. You don't need to withdraw it yet. Okay. If the consensus of the board is that we'll put a condition that they have screening, I guess would it be screening similar to what you would have from a zone-to-zone screening? Is that what is being contemplated here? Well, it would be, you could say it that way. It might be best to be more specific in what type of screening you're talking about so that the applicant understands. I would say screening that screen both noise and sight between the two properties. That wouldn't be hard to do. Is there a section of the ordinance that's already pre-worded that we could reference in a fifth condition? I think Mr. Marks is looking at that. I'm not sure if it would be different zoning screenings necessarily, but I think Mr. Marks has something he might want to show you. And now, Ms. Jones, my feeling is the board, we're getting into the weeds. And so, because Mr. Clark is saying sight and sound screening, and so the board members may have different opinions of what's needed. We could direct your attention to the portion of the ordinance that you can see now. item number two could perhaps be an option for screenings as if it were screening a residential zone i'm not sure i can read that but but autumn correct me if i'm wrong doesn't this mean that they have to have a buffer of 15 feet yes from the property line which would substantially interfere with the pull this back up yeah with with i mean it could be less than 15 feet you would you would be able to change this this is just sort of a jumping off point of something that is in the ordinance that you could perhaps amend to see fit in the situation for the condition in other words what she's saying is that this is just sort of an example of a type of screening you can do I don't think this particular section of the ordinance applies in this situation correct this this would not typically apply because this is for an office zone bordering a residential zone which is not the case here they're both professional office zone properties but since the the morning point use is is a sort of residential type use this is perhaps an appropriate type of screening that you could you could adjust this but it's sort of a jumping off point so you would be making it a condition okay and then how do i get back to be able to talk to the parties again can i just do that anytime i want have them come back up to the podium yeah pretty much okay we're the wild west right? Yeah, procedurally. Okay, first off I'd like to speak with the man from the lantern. If the developer was to do some type of screening, and we're not talking, the options, generally speaking, are usually a hedge or a wood fence or something of that nature. would it change the position of well I think the best statement was made when we discussed some type of noise and sight it's not just the site I mean and the reason the property was built in it that was to build common areas within interior common areas that safe areas where residents with Alzheimer's can go and gather so that I wanted to speak to that because it's very important because they do have interior openings inside that complex where residents are contained but still can be outside in a safe common area so they're gonna hear but that is you know if they're in that safe interior common area you know we still want to address noise and sight that's the issue when when you have Alzheimer's it's very disturbing with you have noises sometimes you know even the train can be very upsetting any types of loud outbursts or screaming it's just it's a one of those conditions the best way I strive to my staff is wake up in a room all of a sudden you don't know how you got there why you're there or what you're doing and you're so frustrated and confused and scared so that's why we have concerns well I would be I would be satisfied in in if there was in agreement that there would be a six-foot wall with with some plantings that go go along there I'd be perfectly happy with that and we would agree to that I do think that would help definitely so you're talking about a masonry wall now are you talking about a fence a wood fence okay talking about a wood wood fence okay and you'd be fine with the wood fence is that I mean I don't know how that would scream noise but I do know that might help with security yeah if you had planned if you had plantings along the fence I think that would make a difference and I guess I still would have the same comment so why is it the adjacent owners responsibility defense can morning point not build a wall or a fence to protect their clients in the way that needs I mean I get it but I'm just wondering why the burden would fall on we're going to be required under the screening ordinance to put either a fence or shrubs in addition to trees and so with the limited distance that we have there between the edge of our parking and the property line we're gonna go with the fence we're gonna do a solid wood fence as a screen as opposed to shrubs and I can tell you there's been a lot of studies as far as deflecting noise a solid fence is gonna do a whole lot more than a bunch of shrubs is going to do I would also like to point out that I would expect I'm not saying anything about the impact that this noise might have but when when you have that solid object obstruction down low any noise that's gonna go beyond that it's gonna be pointed upwards and and so you can go and do a lot of research on this if you've got that solid barrier down for the first six feet in height that's gonna push everything else up so the patio that they have outside the noise from it. Certainly if there's an overwhelming noise, like we're right up against a railroad, by the way, there's railroad cars going up and down right behind both of these properties all the time. There's a Meyers department store across the street with a bar in front of it. So there's a lot of noise coming from all different directions in this neighborhood already. And that overall noise, a train going by, you're not going to be able to deflect that to the extent that you can with a conversation being held on a patio next door. So we're already going to have to provide the solid fence. I wish I had said that earlier when Mr. Clark mentioned wall because that would have maybe headed off some of this conversation. But I think there's a lot of noise here to contend with and we're going to do our part to not make it any worse than it is now. You know, I will note on the plans the that section of the lane is a one-way correct rather the properties of one line so will be cars going back and forth you you have to is on one lane of cars going through there and like i said there are limited parking spaces and the applicant has mentioned that they would they plan on doing a wood fence anyway so it's adding a condition that's a six foot wood fence appears to not be an objection to for the applicant So if we can add it as a condition, that would be perfect. I might point out that condition number three refers to landscaping screening according to the provisions of Article 16 and 18. I don't have 16 and 18 in front of me, but is that what you're referring to when you talk about defense? That's what you're referring to? but well i think we could amend condition three to make it to include that provided however on that side it shall be a six foot wood fence because i think what those sections the article say is they could do either shrubbery or a fence yeah on that northern boundary i think that's okay so i think that would be I think you would amend your motion to revise condition number three, which the applicant has agreed to, to say provided, however, on the northern boundary, the screening shall consist of a six-foot wood fence. Solid wood fence. Six-foot solid wood fence. Yeah, what did I say? Six inches? yeah a six inch solid six foot solid wood fence okay so i would like to amend my prior motion to include the wording that or to more be specific on commission condition number three on the northern boundary that a six foot solid wood fence be placed Ms. Jones, is that good enough? All right. So, any more discussions on the motion? And I'll second that amended motion. Thank you, Mr. Glover. So, she's amended and we have a second. So we have a motion on the floor. Bear with me here. Okay. Okay, the application has been approved. Good luck with your project. Okay. Okay. Yes. Did we do that right, Ms. Jones? Okay. Just want to make sure Mr. Clark was making me anxious. Okay. At this time, do any board members wish to present anything? No comments? any items from staff okay hearing none we will our next meeting will be on August 13th 2018 and since there's no further business we are adjourned Thank you.