Curtis Stone, urban farmer, and it talks about how you can make this $60,000 per half acre. If I can make $30,000 a half acre, show other farmers how to do it, show these millennials out here. One of the fast and growing careers right now on a natural basis is farming for millennials. They want to get into it, but they don't have the land. They can't get access to it because they don't have the credit because they've got a lot of college debt to pay off. They don't have the management experience, and that's what Coleman Kress can give them. It's the access to the land. They don't have to buy, but when they come off of this program after about a year, then they're able to go to a bank like Community Trust or any other bank here in town, and they can say, here's why I think I can pay you back on time. And they're able to show them, you know, step by step on how they're going to be able to make money with this five or six acres that they're going to try to buy. Well, you know, farming in Fayette County is very, very important. And because I represent the farming area, I know that there is this gap from the older farmers that are phasing out And then getting the younger farmers because the middle group really didn't want to get into farming. So cultivating, no pun intended, that younger group to come into that is really admirable. More than 70 percent of the farmers out here are more than 60 years old. And so it's very important for us to retain farmers. The other thing on the African-American side, my great-grandfather purchased this farm out here during the late 1800s, all the way up to 1920, African-Americans in the United States owned 15 million acres of farmland in the United States. That represented about 14% of the available farmland in the United States. Today, African Americans own 3 billion, less than 1%. That's less than 1%? So I want to close my gap and bring it back and help especially disadvantaged African Americans and women to be able to get into farming. I like that, women, women. Got it. Well, you know, let me ask you another thing, Jim, because, you know, again, the 12th District, we have what are called hamlets. Yes. That used to be folks that were out of slavery. Yes. And they started their own little farms. Yes. And there were 15 of them. I think I might have said that already. So this hamlet is under, if you see it, it looks like a tinger, but you don't say it like that. Thank you. Okay, we're broadcasting now. Thank you very much. Good afternoon everybody. This is the Board of Adjustment meeting for October 12, 2020. I want to tell everyone, first say a quick happy, you say happy, but it's Columbus Day and it's Indigenous Peoples Day. And so for those who are celebrating those days, I I wanted to pass that along. We are, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, state of emergency and Governor Beshear's executive orders regarding social distancing, this meeting is being held via teleconference pursuant to Senate Bill 150, as signed by the governor on March 30, 2020, in Attorney General Opinion 20-05, and in accordance with KRS 61.826 because it is to offer a primary physical location for this meeting. We have publicized on the website the zoom-in information and also a call-in number if you're not able to do zoom so that has all been available. My understanding is we will continue to have these meetings by zoom. I thank Mr. Glover, your camera is not on. Mr. Needham, you've disappeared. Well, I want to continue. We do have a quorum showing on the screen. Hopefully, they will get back video conference going before we start hearing cases. So the first item is the minutes have been circulated by the staff. Has everyone had an opportunity to review those minutes? And does anyone have any amendments to the amendments as proposed by staff? Okay. Seeing no hands raised, if you could, please propose a motion for me. I move. Thank you, Mr. Glover. Mr. Glover moves. Your camera's not working, Tommy. Yeah, you all are controlling it, not me. They won't let me in. Let's see here. We'll give us one second. Thank you. All right, you want to remove, Mr. Glover? No. I'll just move. Move to approve the minutes. Thank you, sir. Mr. Clark seconds. All those in favor, please raise your hand in approval. It is unanimous. Thank you very much. Okay, so the next item is I am going to run through the agenda, make sure the applicant is present, and then we'll start putting these in ranked order. it appears to me we only have one recommendation of disapproval and so unless there are members of the public who want to speak on these matters i foresee us moving through these relatively quickly today so that being said i'm going to start on page one this is uh variants uh number one it is plnboa 20-44 may know our uh shahi regarding 387 boston road is the applicant present oh honor mr chair i just received an email from a member of the public that says that our um link on the meeting agenda is incorrect i would just like to verify if anyone had signed in via that link um Can you go to the attendees? We can check with Mr. Shahi in the moment. Did they say which case they're having issues with? with? They are wanting to speak I believe on the 1623 Nicholasville Road variants. It's a member of the public. Well I'll mark that one and hopefully we can get them in before, as well as time is that's going to be the last case heard so we have time to get this fixed because it is recommended for disapproval so we'll probably get through most of other cases before that one is officially heard. Is there a way that Stephanie maybe could send, if I forward her this email, could she email the link to this gentleman? I'm not sure how to find the link on this Zoom, sorry. Autumn, Tracy said she can take care of that if you can send it to her. Okay, all right, thank you. Perfect. Okay, so we have the applicant for the first case, his hand is raised. Is there anything so we could promote him? Good afternoon, Mr. Shahai, if you could turn on your camera and unmute yourself. Oh, did he disappear? He's still in the attendees. We're going to try to promote you again. If you could turn your camera on and unmute yourself. This is for 3870 Boston Road. There you are. If you could turn your, unmute yourself now. Should be a button. Do we need to do it on our end? Oh, yeah, I got it. All right, perfect. How are you doing today? Yeah, good, sir. How are you? I'm doing well. Okay. So the staff has recommended approval. We wanted to make sure you were here. What we'll do is you're going to be the first case call today. Once I get through the full agenda. So if you could sit tight, I'll call you back up in a minute. In the meantime, is there anyone else in the attendees list who wants to speak on this application? No, sir. Okay. So what we'll do then, we're going to go ahead and take you down. demote you from the panel box. We'll call you back in a few minutes and we'll swear everybody in in about five minutes. No problem. So I'll just be online, right? If anything happens, you guys are going to let me know? Yeah, it's going to be online. So you just sit tight on your phone or wherever you're using. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. So next, we're going to number two, which is on page to PLN BOA 20-48 Sharon Rolick regarding 809 Statesman Way is the okay thank you you've raised your hand when you see you is there anyone else here who wants to speak on this application please raise your hand now Yes, please, if you could promote Sharon. Ms. Brock will be promoting me now. One moment, please. Good afternoon, Sharon. If you could turn on your camera and unmute yourself. There you are. Good afternoon. I'm getting some feedback. Wait one second. We're trying to... Okay, it's gone now. The staff has recommended approval, and it looks like there's no one here to speak on this case today except for you. So what we'll do is you will be the second case called. And so we'll go ahead and denote you now. We just want to confirm you're present, and we'll have you called as a second case. Thank you, sir. You're welcome. Okay, so the next case is PLN BOA 20-49 Timothy and Opa Johnson regarding 6701 Jack's Creek Pike. Are either of the Johnsons on? Okay, I see James Monroe has his hand raised. Hey, so does Mr. Johnson, so we can bring both of them up. All right, cool. Tim, if you could turn your camera on for us, Tim, and unmute yourself. Hey, James, how are you doing today? Doing well, thank you. Good. Waiting for your client to get his camera going. There you go. All right. So we've got the Johnsons and Monroe. Do we have anyone else in the audience who wants to speak on this one? Okay. So you've been recommended for approval by the staff. There's no one here in the public that wants to speak. So you'll be the third case that we call. Once I get through everyone's cases, we'll swear you in so that you and James can give any testimony or answer your questions that the board may have. Thank you very much. Thank you. We're going to devote you and we'll bring you back in a few minutes. Thank you. Mr. Chair, I will note that we did receive one letter of support for the Johnson's case. Oh, perfect. received that and also I just received an email from the applicant for the Nicholasville Road application who also is having trouble getting into the meeting and I just forwarded that one to Tracy as well. Okay so for everyone for Autumn if you have any other requests there was a typo on the agenda it's missing the password is missing one number okay and it is correct on our legal ad on the website. Okay. But the password should be 526244. Thank you. Thank you very much Tracy. Hopefully that will expedite things. So I'm going to call case number four which is PLM VOA 20-50 Patrick and Sheila Wilkinson and this is regarding 1180 Centerville Lane. If the applicant for this one, I see Pat Wilkinson is on. If you could raise your hand for us. And we will promote you. All right, Mr. Wilkinson, if you could turn your camera and unmute yourself for us. Pat Wilkinson, we have promoted you to be... Oh, there we go. Nope, there was some movement for a second there. Here it is. Good afternoon, sir. You're still on mute. You can unmute yourself. Perfect. Perfect. All right, you're all set. So, is anyone in the audience want to speak on this matter? Okay. Not here. I don't see any hands raised. So, Mr. Wilkinson, your staff has recommended approval. There's no one in the audience that wants to speak on this matter. So, what we'll do is we will demote you from the panelists, so you'll go back off camera, but you'll be the fourth case that I'll call today. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, the next case is PLMBA 20-51. This is the Campbell case at 1623 Nicholson Road. This is one we've had issues with. So, but in either case, this one's to be heard since it was marked for disapproval. So unless there's anyone who objects, I'll go ahead and just say we'll hear this one and we'll bring the applicant up once we confirm they're on, they've been able to access the Zoom call. You all also should have received one letter on this one. Yes, we got one letter of opposition or an email. Is there just that one email, Autumn? There's just the one. I believe that that is the gentleman who's also trying to access the meeting and will plan on speaking. Looks like that's Randall Barry. Yes. Okay, perfect. So once Mr. Berry gets on and once the applicant gets on we'll have that case called later on and then remind me Autumn to swear them in if I do the swearing in before we're able to get them online. The next case is a conditional use appeal. We had this one was heard last month I believe this it was a the continuance from last month this is plnb away 20-42 uh doug uh visio regarding 901 old todd's road uh doug i see you're on we will promote you right now doug if you could turn your camera on and unmute yourself okay where's my camera there it is there you go yes how are you doing today i'm great how you guys doing all right it looks like uh hopefully it looks like the 30 day work may work out um looks like you and i don't maybe i'll maybe i'll have bigger stuff out uh is is before we go on is is this one in which you're going to want to have a hearing, or are you agreeing to abide by the conditions Autumn's proposed? Yes and no. I asked Autumn. I had some clarifications on because there's some existing fences and some things we can discuss, but I'm pretty much, from what I can tell, that I'm good with it. Okay. Well, what I'm going to do is I'm going to mark yours to be heard. And so, and there's no one here, I don't believe anyone. Please raise your hand if anyone in the audience wants to speak on this one. All right Doug, well what we'll do is we'll demote you again, take you off camera, and then we'll call you up so that you we can go through all the clarifications you're interested in at that time. Can I ask a quick question? I'm looking on the tree planting in the A and B group is, and I see A large trees, but is it that are we looking at type plant uh this is the a and b group is in the is it the landscape manual is the planting manual um if you go on to the um should be on the planning offices website while we're waiting there should be a pdf of it it's the city planting manual yeah i'm looking i'm looking at it now i just don't know if a or if a large trees any of those trees are good or that's my understanding is any of the any of the trees in those group in that group you're allowed to use for your planting okay as the type a trees then there was plant type b bd and all that so i don't know so just anything in the a or the b is fine is that but we'll we'll talk about that yeah we can talk about that but correct you you're choosing from group a or b okay thank All right, thanks, Doug. So we'll go ahead and demote Doug. And we'll go to the next case, which is PLNBOA 20-46 Little Chance Academy. This is 297 Wuxia Way. Yeah, let's see here. uh mr champa um wait where do you go there we go if you could turn your camera on sir and unmute yourself okay you're unmuted i'm unmuted there's my camera perfect now yeah all right um This has been recommended for approval. Is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak on this matter? Hearing none. Okay. Are you going to, are the conditions okay with you? The conditions are as I expected. Okay, perfect. In that case, what I'm going to do is you're going to be the, looks like the fifth case I'll call up. So sit tight and we'll hopefully we'll get through the first four cases relatively quickly. Okay, thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay, now we are on to the administrative appeals. I believe we have one letter for this matter. So this is TLM VOA 20-45, Newtown Springs, LLC, regarding 1445 Newtown Center Way. The applicant can raise their hands. Brittany we're bringing you up and was that correct and there's only one letter there should be two oh yeah you're right there's an email also so we have a handwritten letter and an email for this one both in opposition I believe okay Brittany if you could turn your camera it looks like you're trying to nope You can turn your camera on for us. And while we're waiting for Brittany's camera to turn on, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak to this matter today? Okay, so. Is she got her camera? Are we, or is that? Ms. Newsome, if you can hear us, could you also unmute, please? yeah miss newson we're going to go ahead and demote you since we're not having uh we're not being able to see you or hear you for right now so hopefully we can get that worked out before we have your case called you'll be the sixth case that i called today so we're going to go and demote you now. And that brings us to our last case of the day, which is PLM VOA 20-47, Lexington Housing for the Handicapped, doing business as the Bob Brown House. And that is located at 3057 North Cleveland Road. If the applicant could raise their hand for me. okay all right so we're promoting an amy brown we are promoting a karen vennis is there anyone else in the audience today ladies if you could turn your cameras on and unmute yourself miss brown miss vennis hello how are you guys doing good thanks and you guys are you guys both with the applicant? I am. Miss Venus is in support. Okay, perfect. What we'll do is there's no one else here. You'll be the seventh case that we get called today, assuming that you're okay with the conditions the staff has proposed. Yes. Okay, perfect. Well, it's a pleasure seeing you both. We'll demote you now, and we'll bring you back up. Thank you. Okay. Now, what we're going to do now is we're going to unmute everybody so I can swear you in. That sounds like it took longer than normal when you get through that knocket. And if anyone, this is for Miss Newsome and for the Nicholsville Road project. We will, hopefully you will get your technology working, camera and your speaker or your microphone. All right, looks like Ms. Newsome has called in maybe on a second number. Well, I was going to ask if you'd like to identify these numbers before you were squaring in. That is a great idea. Thank you, ma'am. So we're going to go ahead and Stephanie will start calling out some phone numbers. And if you could, we'll promote you. When you hear your phone numbers, just tell us which case you are on and what your name is. And we'll list that in the attendees list. So please proceed. For number one, three zero four, three six zero one three seven two. We're allowing you to speak now. You can please give us your name and which case you're interested in. We're calling from number one. Hello. Hello. I'm the three zero four Brittany Newsome with Newtown Springs. Okay. Thank you very much, Ms. Newsom. Oh, I've got you real quickly, Ms. Newsom. We'll have you called as the sixth case. And is your camera working on your phone? It should be. Is there a way to test it or do I have to be a camera? Yeah, see if you can get your video to play right now. Ms. Newsome, you won't be able to get it to play just yet. We'll need to promote you to panelists on your other attendee listing. Do we want to go ahead and test it? We can do that. Okay. So I'll need to disable you speaking on this listing, and then we'll promote your other one. There we go. Yes, we can see you. Perfect. So what we'll do is we'll demote you, and then we'll bring you back up when our case is called. All right. Thank you. That's our phone numbers. If you're calling from number 1-859-323-6124, we're allowing you to speak now. Could you give us your name in which case you're interested in, please? Phone number 859-323-6124. You're showing as mute just to let you know. Is there somebody at 859-322- Hello. Oh, hello. Yes. Yes, I'm sorry. I'm trying to reach out without any means for me because the Zoom is not working. Your link, your password is not working, and I wish I could be there. I'm all equipped to do Zoom. I do Zoom all the time. For some reason, we cannot get in. and we are with a 625 Nicholas Vier Road. Is there a way that you can email me your exact Zoom information so I can log in? Yeah, the Zoom link was correct. The password was not, is my understanding. If you have a pen, I'll give you the correct password number. So I was listening in because I'm watching you. I'm watching you guys on the other link. I'm watching you, but I cannot talk. I cannot join in because it's the viewing. I had 526244. Is that the password? I believe it's 5226. No, it's 526244. Try 526244. Yeah, even that number I tried is not working. Okay. So can you do a direct link? Do you know how to just – can I give you my email or everybody's listening? You don't want to do that? Yeah, well, first off, let's get your, well, yes, do you want to give us your email? Now, it's going to be live broadcast. That's fine, that's fine. For us to give her our email and have her shoot us an email quickly if she's not comfortable disseminating her email. Yeah, whichever way, ma'am, would you prefer our email or give us your email? Oh, I can give you my email. Okay. It's VS Victor. Okay. T-H-I. T-H-I T as in Tom H-I B as in boy A-U Okay At gmail.com Perfect So we're going to email this to you right now If you don't get in the next few minutes Just raise your hand again If you can on your phone Tracy Wade. Okay, I've got it. Perfect. Go ahead and call me. I'm going to try. And are you here on that next showcase? Are you here as the applicant? No. Are you here to oppose it or support it? I'm with Coach Lightwood Subdivision at 1625 Nicholas Ville Road. And we're having some issue with some neighbors of ours wanting to, you know, increase on our maybe property. and I'm not in charge of it, but my friend, my colleague is, but he cannot get in. So I'm going to try to set us up so we can join you. All right. So what we'll do then is that case is going to be called and heard in a little while. Okay. That's fine. We'll let you know when it's your chance to talk. Should I stay on the phone? Well, I'm going to stay on the phone until I reach you by Zoom. Until you get your Zoom working. All right. Thank you. I'm going to stay. Thanks. So we have one more number. If you're calling from number 859-509-0929. Thank you. We need to get better glasses. Right. We're allowing you to speak now. If you could give us your name and phone number, please. And you're on mute. You can unmute yourself. There we go. Yes, this is the other number that you just got. I've been trying and trying just like that lady to get in as well. My name is Mickey Heider, and I'm with the Bob Brown case. Okay. And I cannot get into the meeting as well, and I've been trying and trying. Okay. Well, Mr. Heider, are you here in support or opposition to that case? I am in complete support. I pastor the church that's four doors down from the facility, And I also not only represent the church, but I represent several neighbors around the property that are all in support of the zoning change. Okay. So what we'll do, Mr. Brow, I mean, Mr. Hyder, if the link's not working for you, if you want, we can give you the staff's email. You can email them, and we'll send you the appropriate link. That'd be great. Which email? T. Wade. T. Wade. That's T. Wade. T as in Tom. Okay. Is it Lexingtonky.gov? Lexingtonky.gov. All right. All right. Thank you. That's T Wade. All right. Thank you. And what we'll do is before this case is called, if Tracy has not received your email, we'll pull you back up so we can work on it again. all right thank you so much yeah thank you I've been corresponding with Mr. Randall Tracy and I both have we have sent him a link and which he has tried he's also tried the link from the website where the legal ad was posted and he said that neither of those are working for him and who was that Mr. Randall Barrett architecture okay Is he also, I believe he's missed that. Is he able to call in? It appears that Mr. Barrett is in the meeting and has his hand raised. Would you like to speak to him? Sure. Mr. Barrett, you should be able to unmute and speak now. Yes, my name is Virgil Barrett. I am the president of the homeowners association at coach like woods. And we are in opposition to the request. And I think I've sent several emails with my concerns regarding this. Yes. Yes, sir. Yep. We've got your emails on the front of us and we just wanted to make sure you were able to call in so you can have an opportunity to speak on this matter when we call the case. So it sounds like we got that part working. So we'll go ahead and demote you now. But we still need the applicant. Are we still missing the applicant? I don't think the Campbells have they... They also emailed and I corresponded with them as well. I believe... Wait, we got a... There we go. Okay. So if we can... Do you like him promoted or... Yeah, let's promote him. Let's promote him so we can get his – check his video, make sure it's working, correct his name on the – Matt, you are now – there we go. Good afternoon. How are you? Not too bad. Yourself? We're doing well. Okay, so we want to make sure your video is working, your case. The staff has recommended disapproval, and you've got some neighbors who want to speak on this matter also. So you sit tight. you were the I think I can't remember now maybe the case called not last Doug is now getting that honor but you're the second to last case that we'll call appreciate it thank you so we got all of our applicants set Ms. Thibault has raised her hand if you'd like to allow her real quick Mr. Boll we're bringing you up if you can unmute yourself alright were you able to get the zoom to work you've got some neighbors who want to speak on this matter also so you stick tight Veronica can you hear me I'm here I'm listening Doug is now getting that on him I'm with Randall Barrett You're the second last. Okay, you and Randall are together now? Appreciate it. I'm with Randall Barrett. Okay, so what we're going to do is we're going to demote you and take your hand down. Yeah, real quick. Mr. Ball, we'll bring you. Okay, all right, I think we're finally ready. I think we are. Yes. That was 35 minutes, guys. I think that may be the slowest I've ever done. We'll apologize to the staff for all of that. It's starting our hearings. But I think we're now ready to go. So with that being said, we're going to unmute everybody because I need to square you in. Everyone who wants to speak. All right. So everyone is now unmuted. And if you could, you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Say aye. Aye. Everyone who plans on speaking today, all the applicants, please say aye. All right, we will confirm as each case gets called, if we could remind you to do that. So the first case is going to be the variance, ELNBOA 20-44, and this is related to 3870 Boston Road. If we could bring the applicant back. The applicant for this case please raise your hand electronically. It's Shaghi down there. Yeah, that's it. I'm being promoted now, Mr. Shaghi. If you could go ahead and turn your camera on and unmute yourself. Yes. How are you doing this afternoon? I'm good. Good. Were you just sworn in? Yes. Okay, and you can state your name for the record for me. It's Minaj Shahi. Thank you, sir. The staff today has recommended approval of your application, and that approval is based upon one condition. Have you seen that condition? Yes, sir. I have to file the drawing again to the city, I think, right? Yes. and you'll agree to fulfill that condition? Yes, sir. So do I just need to do like when I did apply for the application, like the drawing itself and send it to Autumn? Or how does that work? I believe you were working with Jonathan in building inspection. I would just reach out to him again. Okay. And see what he needs from you. No problem. I could do that. Perfect. Is anyone on the board, you guys have any questions? for staff or for the applicant at this time. Mr. Glover, please proceed. I have a question for legal. Tracy, if you're here, I'm concerned about the precedent if we grant this case because we ordinarily do not approve six-foot fences. So what precedent is this going to set for future applicants? well what before we get um uh tracy jones up tommy would it be better if we have autumn explain the staff's thinking okay i have tracy here for support if we need her um but the the reason that staff recommended approval and we don't believe that this would set a precedent is is because of the odd shape of this lot, this portion of his lot was originally part of the HOA area, and there is a fence that extends along much of that frontage already that was installed by the HOA and is six feet tall. So that is a unique circumstance that does not typically apply to many lots. Additionally, two doors down, there are two or three lots that back to Boston Road, which is an unusual situation in this vicinity, but those yards could actually have a taller fence they could have an eight foot tall fence along the Boston Road frontage so that's another sort of unique circumstance to this very specific sort of pod of houses that there's sort of some variety happening there already that would not apply elsewhere so approving the variance in this location would be based on the specific attributes of this location and would not set a precedent for other front yard fences in our opinion. Well, I mean an odd shaped lot, almost all lots are odd shaped so I'm not sure that that would hold up but I am curious about other than that. I understand it's a unique piece of property. But, you know, in the legal sense, every piece of property is unique. So I'm just curious. And I understand why this is unique, but it'd be nice to have something, I think, a little more on firm legal footing before we grant it. I mean, I'm sympathetic to the applicant. Let me ask this question. this Mr. Clark the fences the fences that were already there that we're connecting to Autumn are those already six foot fences that's correct the existing HOA fence that exists on the HOA property and along much of Mr. Shahi's frontage is a six foot tall black metal fence he's plugging into that with a six foot tall wood fence that's what I was concerned about thank you good afternoon miss jones good afternoon um i don't i think um to to compound on what autumn said this is i don't know if you all have actually seen this or not but this is a really i mean i'm not using the word unusual in a very generic sense here but it is a really unusual situation. I mean, when it, when these houses were built, there are some houses that literally their backyard is directly adjacent to the next house's front yard. It's just, it's a most odd configuration of houses at that location, also compounded by the fact that the HOA lot is also adjacent. So I don't think it's going to be precedent setting in that just because of the way they were developed, it set up such an unusual and unique situation that isn't going to create any harm or any adverse effects on anybody else because the houses are already structured that way with backyards and front yards. And it's just a very different circumstance from most any that So I don't think considering variances in the situations, you're going to see something like this again where precedent is going to come into play. Tracy, you understand why I'm asking. I'm not concerned about this application so much. I'm concerned more about future applications that also claim to have an odd-shaped lot that is next to some HOA property and with fences where the adjacent lots are facing the other direction. Right. No, I understand that. And I think that, you know, as you know, we have to consider these on a case by case basis. And, you know, unless we can have a fairly I can't think of another situation where if you see if you look at this on the ground where it looks like this, it's just very unusual. So I don't think we need to work with the president in this case. OK. on up real quick is there a way for us to pull up an aerial sure um let me pull up that may help us show for the for the record the how the houses are oriented um and then how that plays into this venting sure may i share my screen yes please all right So here we have Mr. Shahi's property. You can see the aerial view here. So it's a very unusual sort of triangular shape abutting to this is the HOA land over here. If you follow my arrow over here. So the portion of the fence that is in question is right along here adjacent to Mr. Shahi's driveway and then along his driveway going back towards his house. It's only 12 and a half feet here and then the rest of that entire frontage already has the existing HOA fence. So you can see that the majority of this sort of weird portion of his lot already has the six foot tall fence that the HOA installed. So he's looking at this 12 and a half foot segment and then this 10 foot segment here to finish out the fence. So in total, he's put a lot of- I also have some photos of the fence. It has been constructed already. You can see here where this is the existing HOA fence that it's joining in with and going over towards Mr. Shahi's house and then back towards his yard area back here. Again, where it's abutting to the existing fence and the full project area. Let me say again, the fact that the fences that were already there were six foot, I think that makes all the difference in the world. I don't have any problem with it in that particular case. I think that makes it much different. Thank you, Autumn. Any more questions for staff at this time or legal or the applicant? Okay, hearing none, then I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I recommend approval of PLNBOA 20-44. Manoj Shahi, requesting a variance to increase the allowable height of a fence on the front yard of four feet to six feet in a planned neighborhood residential property located at 2870 Boston Road. Based on the staff's recommendation and subject to the condition as listed. Thank you, Mr. Clark. Do I have a second? I second the motion. Joan Whitman seconds. Any discussion on this motion for approval? All right, hearing none, then I will place it to a vote. If you could both raise your right hand and also vote electronically. Oh, wait a second. Tommy, are you voting in approval? Okay. So it looks to me like we're unanimous. Thank you very much. Does anyone plan on voting against this just to make sure the record's clear? Okay. Sure, your application's been approved. I would say good luck to your project because you've already done it. So. Thank you. You're welcome. So do I have to be in the meeting, rest of the meeting or? You can drop off now. You just need to make sure to contact. Yeah, I'll contact Jonathan. And get that permit board. I would do that. I really appreciate all your help and thank you. You're welcome. Have a good day. All right. Thank you, Autumn. Okay, our next case is PLM BOA 20-48 related to 809 Statesman Way. We could pull up Sharon back up. Yeah, her hand is raised. Sharon, if you could turn your camera on and unmute yourself. All right. All right. We can see you now. Sarah, could you mute your speaker or something? I think I'm getting feedback. Wait, it's gone now. Okay. Ma'am, if you could, were you sworn in earlier? Yes, sir. Thank you. If you could state your name for the record. Sharon Brolich. Good afternoon, ma'am. And it looks like staff has recommended approval. That approval is based on two conditions. Have you seen those conditions? Yes, sir. And are you willing to abide by those conditions? Yes, sir. Thank you. At this point, I will open it up to the board members if they have any questions for staff or for the applicant at this time. This is another one where the work has already been completed? Yes. Okay. And just out of curiosity, this is really close to one we had over near UK campus. Remember where they extended? Actually, I guess we've had a couple of those. I just wonder why we're more willing to be accepting of this extension of the driveway. In this instance, it's the location of the property relative to the intersection that is really the special circumstance that justifies the need for the variance here. Ms. Berlick's property is directly across from a stop sign heading into the neighborhood, and there have been a number of incidences where her cars have gone through that stop sign and have hit her tree and caused damage. This is not a circumstance, again, this is very particular to this particular piece of property and would not apply to other properties on the same street even. but since her house is located right at that intersection, there's a real safety concern about on-street parking. So allowing the wider driveway to get an additional car off the street in this location is appropriate. There are also mailboxes along one portion of Mrs. Rolica's frontage, so that also creates another conflict for on-street parking. So those two things taken into account together are the reason that we recommended approval. Does that have the one car garage, right? Yes. So don't we have the specific rule, and it's probably in here, about how wide that driveway could be for the one car garage? That is correct, and that's where the setback, we're reducing the setback from six to zero for additional paved parking, because the portion that goes beyond the width of the driveway is considered additional paved parking so that's where the setback rule kicks in so functionally yes the driveway is wider but what we call the driveway is the portion that extends into the garage and anything that is beyond that width is additional paved parking and i have uh i share the same concern as miss carter i'm i'm concerned again about the precedent setting nature of this i appreciate all of you're pointing out the unique features of this particular piece of property. I would prefer to have applicants for this kind of thing come before us before they have done the work. It's disconcerting for us to see this after it's already done, come in to ask for forgiveness rather than permission. Autumn, would you throw up your aerial and show us, walk us through what the request is and what your conditions are and of course what your reasoning is. Share my screen. All right. So we've got the this photo here. This is rolling his property is right here at 809. I don't know how over here we can see at the zoom in level, you can see that the stop sign is located right here. She's cited several instances of folks coming through the stop sign without really stopping or speeding through and having issues making this turn. So as you can see, this is an instance that's not super common and would only really affect her property and potentially the adjacent property, but would not affect other properties along Statesman Way. So that unique circumstances is a justification for allowing the variance. I can go through and show you some photos that were selected. Let's go back and show us where the mailbox and the other hindrances are to parking on the street. Okay. So you can see right here in the aerial photo this little white block here next to the tree. That's the mailboxes. And then this is the other portion where more likely some would utilize off-street parking because that mailbox is not in the way. But again it's directly across from that intersection, that point of conflict. Okay, you can go on now. Go ahead and show you some of the photos of the completed work. We are recommending that she install an additional railing to come across here because we did see this as a potential safety hazard that a vehicle could pull in and sort of go a little bit too far and have a point of conflict with the pedestrian exiting the house or something like that. So we did recommend an additional railing here to sort of provide that buffer. that's another requirement of the zoning ordinance that pedestrian walkways be separated from vehicular use pavement so so that's to get at that requirement but this is the additional paving that's been done here you can tell the new pieces yeah I don't again I know I guess I'm not understanding you know why we're trying to get even additional street parking here. I mean, I understand what we're talking about at the intersection, but we do have the garage. She's got one spot in the garage. We have one spot in the driveway, so she's got two spots already off street parking for a house. And, you know, we do, we have houses that we give less accommodation for just even one spot. Typically in those cases, those houses are located in areas where they could also have off-street park or on-street parking in addition to whatever existing parking is available. So in this instance, we don't feel that the off-street or the available on-street parking, I'm sorry, is appropriate or safe. So in this particular location, on this particular piece of property, we feel that it is acceptable to allow for the additional parking space on her property. Normally in another neighborhood, we might say that you have a parking space and you have a parking space in your garage. So you could also park your additional vehicles on the street. And that would be acceptable because on-street parking is an acceptable means of parking. But in this particular location, the most available location for on-street parking creates a safety hazard. so uh bottom if i own a piece of property that has uh mailboxes obstructing the the part of the property on one side and a street light or public sign on the other and i'm at the bottom end of a t intersection i i can get this kind of variance as well I mean there are a lot of... Every time we're assessing a variance we're looking at the individual piece of property and the individual circumstances that are related to that particular piece of property. So if there were another piece of property with this exact same set of circumstances we would likely recommend the same recommendation but it's highly unlikely that another piece of property would have the exact same constraints and exact same situation. Okay, thank you. Any more questions? Okay. Well, in that case, I'll entertain a motion from somebody. Well, that's not a good sign. Sharon, is there anything you want to add before I press these guys a little bit harder to give me a motion? I do have a couple of points to make. my grandchildren were coming over to take care of me after a surgery was the preemptive reason why I had the driveway extended because they they one of them would have had to park in front of my house and as I've shown in the pictures that I submitted my tree has been hit several times out there, at least three since I've lived there, because people come through that stop sign. It's a cut through between Winchester Road over to Henry Clay to come through Statesman Way and around through Lindy Lane. So that was the preemptive measure that I took. As far as not getting a permit, I had no idea that I had to get a permit. And when I asked the contractor that came to work on my property, he told me he didn't, I did not have to have a permit. So those are a couple of things. And I do have a presentation that I can show you the pictures where my tree has been hit and exactly where I am across the street from the stop sign. And the fact that people really don't stop at that stop sign is probably the biggest problem that I can see. I just wanted to do my due diligence in order to protect my grandchildren. I would feel really bad if something happened to anybody there, not just my family, but to anybody that was in that predicament where you had cross traffic coming through and then someone trying to get out of a vehicle parked in front of my house. Yeah, I think it's probably a good idea for you to go through your short presentation for the board. Did we need to give her a share screen? You can do share screen. Okay. Now that's a good presentation. So I'm basically just saying that it will not negatively affect public health. Actually, it would be better for someone to be able to. Real quickly, did you actually have slides or something on your presentation? Yes. Do you see those? No, I just see myself. That's why I said it was a good presentation. Okay. I believe we have a copy of her presentation if she cannot get to it. It's saved on our Google Drive, and we can access that, I believe. Okay, yeah. Sharon, let's stop your share, and Autumn will walk through your slides. You just tell her when to click. Actually, I think that Stephanie or Tracy, are they in here? Yes. Normally, they would be the ones who would do that. I would probably get to it. Stephanie's on it. Okay. While we're waiting, does engineering have any, or traffic engineering have any? You want to, while we're waiting to pull up the presentation? Sure. We are very commonly faced with providing pavement markings, curb markings in areas very similar to this. We do not encourage parking in an intersection. I know this is a local road, but we would, in most, looking at the aerial, most likely we would mark this as a no parking zone in front of her home. I know in front of the mailboxes we would probably do that. We work with the Postal Service routinely and marking no parking zones in front of mailboxes. Same thing with fire hydrants. We would not mark a no parking zone in front of a street light. However, since this is a middle of a T intersection, at least 30 feet back from the stop sign and then directly across from the intersection would most likely be a no parking zone. We do not actively seek those, but we do address those on a complaint basis. And so this applicant could contact the Division of Traffic Engineering and we would go out and assess the situation. But looking at it from aerial view right now, it would most likely qualify for a no parking zone. so would you um recommend those areas not be used for parking in front of her home yes in front of the mailboxes yes and in front of uh at least 30 feet back from the stop condition on loudon would be a no parking area as well okay Okay, so thank you guys. Do you have any questions for him? Anyone else have any questions for Stephen? We haven't seen him in a while, so this is your chance to ask some questions. Okay, so we're now able to share a screen so we can pull your presentation up. Okay, on the next screen, it actually starts. So I do not, I believe that it actually would be better for the public in order to be able to keep the additional parking space because it's very dangerous in my community. based on the numerous traffic violations that do occur. There's frequent traffic between Statesman Way to Lindy Lane because it's used as a cut through from Winchester Road to Henry Clay. And I believe that the improvements to my driveway do not alter the character or the general vicinity of the area. On the next screen, this is a picture of where my house sits from my front porch directly across to the stop sign. I can tell you any time that you sit there, very few people actually stop at that stop sign. On the next screen, since I put the driveway in, there was actually an accident that involved a vehicle running into my utility pole. Had someone been parked there, there would have been damage not only to the vehicle that ran the stop sign, but also to the vehicle parked in front of my house. and also risk of harm to whoever might have been getting in or out of a vehicle. On the next screen, you can see the picture that I took of my utility pole. I believe it's probably been hit more than once, but this is the only time that I caught a picture of it. And whoever hit it actually left a piece of their vehicle behind. On the next screen, here is some additional proof of my tree has been hit more than once, at least three times since I've lived there, and maybe even before that. on the next screen. It's just another reason why I believe that, you know, this endangers the lives of my family, friends, visitors, parking there in front of my house on the street. I've also been advised that there have been a request for two more speed bumps because people do. It's not only the volume of traffic, but it's the speeding traffic that comes through there. So, completion, since the completion of my driveway, it has allowed both of my grandchildren to park their vehicles in the driveway, and we just all feel a lot safer not taking the risk of being hit when parking on the street. On the next screen, it is my understanding when the neighborhood was developed that Loudoun Avenue did not extend Statesman Way and that after Loudoun Avenue became the cut through, it was kind of a cut through after it was developed that way. So it just allows the extension on my driveway to allow another car to park there so that I can actually have two cars. And as Autumn mentioned before, it's there's a the neighborhood mailbox is right there directly in front of the other side of the house. On the next screen, just explaining about my surgery, I'm going to have to have more surgery, and I just like to have my grandchildren be able to park off the street, much less anybody else without having to park on the grass. And so in mid-June, I did have the driveway extended. The contractor was asked to be very respectful of the neighbors, and he did complete the driveway work in two to three days. We didn't bring in any heavy equipment. I just didn't want my front yard to become a mud pit because a lot of the neighbors walked past my house to access the mailboxes in front of my house. On the next screen, I was told by the contractor that I did not need a permit. So in all honesty, I had absolutely no ill intent to violate any zoning ordinances. I did call and make sure that there was and filled out the appropriate paperwork to have the people come with the utilities to mark lines on my property. That was what I thought I needed to do. Of course, then I got the violation notice. And so on the next screen. I contacted the zoning enforcement. I was told I could not obtain a permit. Phone calls and emails ensued to undertake my due diligence, and due to the short deadlines, I asked for an extension which was granted. On the next screen. This really takes me, I had to think a lot about this because I wasn't sure what to do. I did decide that a variance needed to be requested just for the health and safety of my family and my grandchildren. And so after filing for the variance, then it was determined that my driveway actually exceeded 50 percent. Obviously, I didn't know about the permit. I really didn't know about this. So on the next screen, just why I think it would be kind of against an additional burden or not a good reason to take the driveway up, more than likely I will have to have heavy equipment come in and it would cause a disturbance. It would take considerable time to complete the project, I feel like, because of the weather that we're moving into fall and winter. And my front yard will be a mud pit, which would be an eyesore. And not only that, but a mess for my neighbors walking past to retrieve their mail. On the next screen. I do believe it will cause an additional interference. digging up the front yard that could cause additional traffic accidents. And there's been a significant amount of time and resources already put into this project. And probably and definitely the most important reason is the safety factor of my grandchildren. I feel anybody that comes to visit me that has to park on the street in front of my house will be exposed to a greater risk of harm. And so that is, of course, my greatest reason. I am, if you go to the next screen, I do agree to the recommendations and that the staff recommendation of installing the railing and obtaining an after-the-fact permit. and on the next screen, I can just tell you that this is, I really try not to trouble my neighbors. Bringing this type of attention to myself is totally out of my comfort zone. I'll tell you how extremely nervous I am doing this. And requesting a variance for me is really stepping out of my comfort zone, but I just want to do the right thing for my family. in my neighborhood. And I just would hope that you would see my point of view and I appreciate your time and attention. Thank you, ma'am. We can stop sharing now. Does anyone have any questions at this time for the applicant or for Autumn or for Steve? Okay, well, thank you. Once again, I think I'm back to I need a motion one way or the other from somebody. Okay, Brandon, I always get mixed up. So if you make a motion for disapproval, do I need Tracy? Yes, because we would need to have different findings of facts. Okay. So if that's the way the board is leaning, which appears to be, then we would probably want to take a five-minute recess and let you get with Tracy. What's the best way, Autumn, for, I forget, is it email? Email, yeah. Email is probably the best way, Raquel, for you and Tracy to go back and forth with. So what we'll do is we will take a five-minute break. Thank you. We're recessed. And then Autumn, will you be able to share screen what Raquel has? I don't have it. Tracy Wade should have received a copy. Oh, that's right. Never mind. Yeah, we could have Tracy Wade or Stephanie put on the screen. Okay. We are ready when you are, Mr. Chairman. Okay. I'm waiting for one more board member. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I'm just going to show you what she's doing. Yeah, exactly. That way it's officially on the record better. That's all I thought. Yeah, that's all they did. What's that? No, I'm waiting for Tommy to come back. Okay. Yeah. Are we able to see if he's back yet? It's probably with a share screen that gobbles up all the panel. In my experience software is different every time I open it up. Thank you. Thank you. share screen once Raquel is ready to move forward. Okay. Okay. Lex TV, I think we're ready. Go right ahead. All right. Welcome back, everybody. Sorry about that. We are now out of recess. I believe that Ms. Carter wanted to make a motion and she had some alternative findings of fact to support her motion so if we could share screen for her. So what you would do is you would read the motion but you would say disapprove and then you would say based upon this finding of fact. Okay so I'm looking for disapproval of PLN VOA 20-48 Sharon Roelick's request for variance to reduce the required front setback for additional paid parking from six foot to zero foot and an administrative appeal to allow greater than 50 percent of the required front yard to be paved in order to allow an existing driveway expansion to remain in a planned neighborhood residential zone on a property located at 809 statesman way because there are no special circumstances that justify the need for the variance and there is already adequate parking both in existing driveway and garage. Thank you Ms. Carter. We can now turn the share screen off. Do we have a second on Ms. Carter's motion? I'll second. All right we've got a first and a second. Before we vote we'll have discussion on the motion. I'm going to plan on voting against Ms. Carter's motion. I think there are circumstances as shown by the staff's report and by the evidence given today. I think this is distinguishable from some of the other cases we had and the fact that she does live on this T and it does make it difficult to park on the street. That's just my two cents. Of course, we're now open to discuss the motion. If no one wants to discuss, go ahead. I'm sorry. I'd just also like to mention that the neighboring house, the deciding factor for me was the neighboring house has no street parking. So there's no spot in front of there to park. So while I appreciate the concern, you know, the obligation to give additional street parking when there is two spots of off street parking and her neighbor doesn't have any, you know, I just, that was a deciding factor for me. Thank you. I'm curious to know from legal whether or not the findings or the justification for the motion is adequate to sustain any kind of appeal. Tracy, you want to jump in on that? It's a legal question. Tracy wrote those, Tony. okay that there was only one only one reason and the reason was no special circumstances so was that sufficient to sustain it on appeal do you think um well i think it's our best effort to sustain it on an appeal because that's been the discussion that you all had in the course of the meeting today okay that's what it needs to be based on thank you Mr. Clark, you're on mute. There we go. There we go. I should have made a motion to approve because that's the direction I was going. So I can't convince myself that there's not special circumstances. So I just feel like I have to vote against the motion to disapprove, although I certainly understand Carter's concerns. But I do think there are special concerns. And so I think we have to take that into consideration. So I would be voting against the motion. Thank you, Mr. Clark, for being 15 minutes late. Thank you. Thanks for pointing that out. You're welcome. You're very welcome, sir. Anyone else want to speak to this motion? Because once again, once we have a vote, we can always have a motion going the other direction if that's where it was going. Normally, when we have nobody speaking up to approve, that means it's going the direction of the negative. So... Hi, Brandon. Let me ask the legal rule. I mean, go ahead. Go ahead, Chad. Yeah, just my opinion on this is, you know, we obviously have voted these down in the past. And, you know, that was my first initial reaction. And I think I'm going to stay with that because I feel as though traffic engineering probably said it best. I think there's some other options that could happen here. Obviously, the applicant wants to preserve space for her, but I do think she's in a unique spot. but I don't think what she you know she still has two spots available with two cars uh back to back that's kind of how those houses were designed and um I feel like probably limiting the parking in front uh is is the best bet that kind of what Stephen recommended so that's why I'm gonna probably probably uh not go with this thank you sir any other comments before I pull a vote okay so we have a motion on the table to disapprove this application at this time i'm going to go ahead and call the call the vote so if you are in favor of raquel's carter's motion which is to deny the application please raise your hand for me so i can count those one so i've got miss one two three four five that is five approving miss carter's motion um oh those opposed please raise your hands that's two um so the motion carries the application has been denied um so sharon at this point you will need to get with autumn and with uh autumn Does she just need to get with you about the post process? You will probably need to get in touch with building inspection. The process will just be that the pavement will have to be removed. And as always, you've got a right to appeal to the circuit court. That's correct. So thank you very much. We're going to demote you now. We'll go to the next case. May I ask a question? Sure. Who should I contact in the building enforcement? Is that Jonathan or someone else? I would get in touch with Jonathan. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Okay, we will go ahead and demote her now this time and we'll bring up our next case. So our next case is PLM BOA 20-49, Timothy and Oprah Johnson. Yeah, I think James Monroe was also on this one, I believe is my recollection. Yes. Yeah. Mr. Monroe has a great system. Okay. We're now promoting you, Mr. Monroe, and then we will promote the Johnsons next. And I'll remind you that you received a letter in support of this application. That's right. Thank you very much, Autumn. I appreciate that. Let's see here. So I see James. Let's see here. How did Mr. Johnson? And the Johnsons. If you could turn it. There we go. So, Mr. Johnson, if you could turn your – there we go. You're unmuted now. If you could state your guys' names for the record, please. Sure. Timothy Johnson. Oprah Johnson. Nice to meet you both. And then, James, if you could introduce yourself. James Monroy. And then you were all sworn in at the earlier part of the hearing. If you could say yes. Yes. Thank you very much. So we've got one. Let me check in here. I don't know if I have that one in this pile. But there should be one letter in support of this application that should have been in the Google drop for everyone to have read before the hearing today. The staff has recommended approval, so this is going to be directed to Mr. and Mrs. Johnson. They've recommended approval based upon the three conditions. Have you seen those? We have. Thank you. And you're willing to abide by those? We are. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, can I get a clarification on condition number one, please? Condition number one says per the application materials and site plan, are we saying the house has to be in the exact location or just 87 feet from the road? What is the staff's clarification on the site plan of that? If you do end up going back beyond 87 feet, that would be acceptable. Okay. But yeah, it's that it has to be at least the 87 feet as shown in that general location, I think. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Then we agree. Great. Does anyone from the board have any questions for staff or the applicant or want to see a presentation on this matter? Okay. I've got a question for either Mr. Monroe or the Johnsons. Do you have any neighbors, existing neighbors now on your same side of the street? Yes, we do. I didn't see them either on Google Earth or PVA office map. Are they right next door to you? Tommy, if you look at Exhibit C, I think it shows it. Exhibit D also has a recorded plaque to the direction to the right if you're facing the street. 6751, 6771, 6791, and 6811. And you'll see on that plat exhibit D that all of those have a 50 foot building line. I'm sorry, which tract is the one that this application is for? I think we're tract four. Is that right, James? No, it's not. It's actually not on this plat. If you look at exhibit D, you'll see Robert H. Elsa and Carol. that was um that's the track that we are at 6701 jack street which is just to the left of track four so what happened was it was a master parent property and they subdivided a part of that property off and the johnson's property was left with the remaining residual land by deed but all the other properties a part of that was a part of this plat if you look at exhibit b uh which way is jack's creek pike is it to the is it to the top of the page or the bottom of the page it would be um by the bottom of the page okay thank you yes and on exhibit c is the is the johnson property the property that's shown in yellow or is that the 300 plus back uh the entire johnson property is shown in yellow on exhibit c okay thank you I just had a question. How many acres is exhibit, is it, is, is there property? 11.12. Sorry. 11.12. 11.12. Okay. Thank you. them. Make sure you keep your house area under 11, the 1.12 so you can get that ag exemption on the balance. No, seriously, no, they may take it away. If you make your driveway and stuff too two big square footage. Any other questions for James or the Johnsons or staff at this point? Okay, hearing none, then I would entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move the approval of PLN BOA 20-49, Timothy and Opa Johnson's request for of areas to reduce the required front yard setback from 300 feet to 87 feet in an agricultural rural zone on property located at 6701 Jack's Creek Pike for the reasons stated in the staff report I'm subject to the three conditions therein. Thank you sir do I have a second. Mr. Needham is raising his hand for the second. At this point, is there any discussion of the motion? Seeing none, I will call to a vote. Please raise your hand if you vote in affirmative. That is unanimous votes. Good luck with your project. Thank you. You're very welcome. Thank you, guys. Have a good afternoon. That brings us to case number four. This is PLN BOA 20-50 Patrick and Sheila Wilkinson regarding 1180 Centerville Lane. We could bring up Mr. Wilkinson. Okay Mr. Wilkinson we've just promoted you so you can turn your camera and your microphone on. You can unmute yourself. There we go. Now you're looking in the right direction. There we go. How's that? All right. Good afternoon, Mr. Wilkinson. Thank you for being patient today. Number one, if you could confirm that you were sworn in earlier today. Yes. Thank you. And you can state your name for the record. Patrick Wilkinson. Thank you very much, sir. It looks like the staff has recommended approval of your application today. That approval is subject to three conditions. Have you seen those? Yes. You're willing to abide by those? Yes. Thank you, sir. At this point, what I'm going to do is since this is recommended for approval, I will open this up to the panel to see if they want any additional information from you or from staff related to this application. Okay I see none in that case I will then ask if anyone is ready to make a motion on this application. Mr. Chair I move to approve PLNBOA 20-50 for Patrick and Sheila Wilkinson request for a variance to reduce the required side yard setbacks from 25 to 10 feet in order to construct an addition in an agricultural rural zone on property located at 1180 Centerville Lane based on the staff's recommendation and subject to the three conditions as listed. Thank you Mr. Clark. Is there a second? Second the motion. Ms. Whitman has seconded it. Any discussion on this motion before I call a vote? Okay hearing that if you vote in affirmative please raise your hand. I show... Okay oh there we go. I show a unanimous vote now. A couple guys were a little bit slow on the draw but we got all the votes counted. Mr. Wilkinson your application has been approved and we wish you good luck in your budget. Thank Thank you. You're very welcome. Okay, the next case in our agenda, actually the next two cases in our agenda are marked to be heard. So I will now skip down to page three, conditional use appeal number two, which is PLM BOA 20-46 Champs Academy regarding 297 of Ruscio Way. If we could bring Mr. Champ back up. Champ, I apologize. Mr. Champa you're being promoted so once you get noticed you can turn your camera and your microphone on. Good afternoon. Oh, there we go. Perfect. So we can see you and we can hear you. If you could, Forby, if you could confirm you were sworn in earlier today. I was. Thank you. If you could state your name for the record. Nick Champa. And if you could state your capacity with Little Champs Academy. We are Champs Entertainment Complex, located at 297 Ruscio Way. and I would... Are you the owner? I am. Okay, perfect. That's all I needed. Since the application was made in the name of an entity, I just wanted to confirm you're the owner. The staff has recommended approval today for you to move forward. That approval is based upon you abiding by three conditions. Have you seen those today? I have. Are you willing to agree to abide by those today? Yes. Thank you, sir. At this point, I'll ask the panel, is there anyone who would like to ask either staff or the applicant any questions related to the application? Mr. Champa, this is Tommy Glover. From whom will you need to get a license to operate a child care facility? The cabinet for family and health services would be the, they would be the people who would issue the certified childcare license. Thank you. Which is one of the conditions. Correct. Any further questions at this time for discussion? Is it not that I would entertain a motion if you want to move forward? Mr. Chair, I move the approval of PLN VOA 20-46 Little Champs Academy's request for conditional use to establish a child care facility in a light industrial zone on property located at 297 Ruscio Way for the reasons stated in the staff report and subject to the three conditions stated. thank you Mr. Glover do I have a second Raquel Carter has raised her hand to second the motion any discussion on that motion seeing or hearing none then if you would vote in the affirmative if you are in favor of the motion by raising your right hand and that would be unanimous So your application's been approved. Good luck with your new adventure. Appreciate it. Thank you. You're welcome. So am I now able, so I can now get beer and have child care? And laser tag. And laser tag. Yeah, they've really expanded it. Yeah, they've really expanded it. So I think they're in front of us like almost once a year anymore with the new thing. Opportunity. So that is going to bring us to our, I think, administrative appeals cases, which is on page four. The first one is PLNBOA 20-45, Newtown Springs, LLC, regarding 1445 Newtown Center Way. If we could bring up Ms. Newsom back. And I believe we have this one. We have one email and one letter in opposition. you guys should have had access to in the Google Drive. Good afternoon, Brittany. If you could, if you could confirm that you were sworn in earlier. Oh, I can't hear you. Is she on? Yeah, you might have to bring in her phone as well. All right, we're going to try to bring in your phone too. Just a loud telephone. What is it? We lost your camera. Okay. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you, but now we can't see you. Okay. One second. There we go. All right, are we back? Okay. There we go. If you could affirm, will you sworn in over here? Yes. Perfect. If you could state your name for the record. Brittany Newsome. If you could state your relationship with Newtown Springs LLC. I'm the business development manager of integrated sign and graphics, and we are the fabricators and installers of the signage. Okay, so you're authorized to bind the applicant today? Yes. All right, perfect. It looks like the staff has recommended approval, and that approval is based upon two conditions. Have you and your client reviewed those? Yes. And you're willing to agree and bind your client to abide by those? Yes. Perfect. At this point, I will open it up for questions from the panel. If anyone has any questions for themselves or if anyone wants to bring up any material in the letters and emails of opposition that we received. Mr. Chair one question I'd like to ask I didn't see anything about the height of the sign and I know that it is regulated and I just wondered how tall the sign is Brittany it will be 77 or 72 square feet no no no how high what's the what's the height Oh, wait. I got an exhibit here. It looks like it's going to be 20 feet tall. Oh, yes, it is. My apologies. I apologize. There was an exhibit on our materials that shows, I guess, a panel-type sign. so are all these activities going to go on inside this one gas station yes wow i'm excited for hothead burritos to come to town yeah i've never heard of them um does anybody uh else have any questions about the uh sign request Okay. Well, hearing none, in that case, I will entertain a motion from one of the board members. I move for approval of PLN-BOA 20-45 Newtown Springs LLC to request for an administrative appeal to transfer 22 square feet of signage from one allowable freestanding sign to another in order to construct a 72 square foot freestanding sign on split zone property in neighborhood business agricultural urban zones on a property located at 1445 Newtown Center Way. Based on the staff's recommendation and the two conditions listed. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second? I second the motion. So I've got Ms. Carter made a motion and Ms. Whitman had seconded that motion. Anyone want to discuss the motion? Okay, hearing none, if you vote in favor of the motion, please raise your hand. I show that vote being unanimous. Good luck with the project. Thank you so much. Thank you guys for your time today. And thank you, Autumn, for all of your work with me. You're welcome. Have a great day. Okay, so we're now going to go to the second administrative appeal, and this is PLMBOA 20-47, Lexington Housing for the Handicapped, doing business as the Bob Brown House, a property located at 3057 North Cleveland Road. If we could bring the applicant. I think this Brown is the only applicant. Yes, okay. Good afternoon, Ms. Brown. How are you? I'm good. How are you? I'm doing well. If you could confirm for me that you were sworn in earlier today. Yes, I was. If you could state your name for the record. Amy Brown. And if you could tell me your relationship with the applicant. I'm the director of the Bob Brown House. Thank you, ma'am. I do know we have a couple members in the audience who were here in support of this application. We may not need to hear from them because the staff has recommended approval, and that approval is subject to conditions. Have you read those conditions? Yes, I have. And you agree to abide by those conditions? Yes, I did. All right. Thank you, ma'am. At this point, is there anyone on the board who wants to hear from the members of the public in support and or who wants to ask any questions of Ms. Brown or Autumn and get a better understanding of the project? Okay. Well, hearing nobody, I will note that we do have members of the public that are here to support this application, but it looks like the panel is ready to proceed. So if I can hear a motion. Mr. Chair, I've got, I guess, a point of order. In response to your invitation for questions, I do have a question that may be a legal question. Article 7-6C mentions two things that we have to find if we authorize this. as I read it. I don't see either one of those findings in the reasons A and B. Maybe they are, but I'd like somebody to confirm that for me. The 7.6C says that if we approve the appeal, we must find that the nonconformity would not increase the scope and would not have an adverse impact on future development of the property or the surrounding area. And I'm looking to see where those findings are. And I guess they should be in the recommendation for approval, but I didn't see that language and so i'm wondering if if a motion to approve would be defective for those reasons if we if we approve it as as stated or if we need to add those two additional findings i think that those items are addressed within the body of the staff report you could certainly add those additional findings if you would like i mean we could write something up fairly quickly um so it says in 7-6 that the board must find that the non-conformity of the use would not be increased in the scope of or area of its operation um the applicant is not planning on increasing the area of operation they're planning on utilizing the existing building there will be no changes to the structure or the to the property um they will be serving fewer patients or residents in this new venture, so it is a lesser scope of operation. It also says that the board would not have an adverse impact on the existing or future development. I think we addressed that in the existing findings, that the approval of the request would not sorry. In A, yes, that it would not adversely affect the subject or the surrounding properties and that the use would likely have a positive change with less traffic. And then in the second finding, we discussed the fact that the two uses, the existing nursing home use and the proposed use of assisted living are within the same zoning category where they're first permitted to be allowed. So I think those two findings are getting at what's mentioned in Article 7, but if the board were inclined to add additional findings, that would be fine. If the staff doesn't think we need the additional findings, then I don't either. Autumn, is that what you're saying? You do not find a way to compare? We'll give it a few thumbs up, so I think we are fine with what we have now. Perfect. Thank you, Autumn. Thank you, Tracy, for confirming that for us. so i think we're back to um does anyone want to make a motion mr chair i move we approve plnvoa 20-47 lexington housing for the handicapped dba the bob brown house request for an administrative appeal to change one legally non-conforming use nursing home to another assisted living in an agricultural zone on property located 3057 North Cleveland Road. The reason is stated in the staff report and subject to the two conditions listed. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. We have Mr. Glover has approved. Anyone, Mr. Clark, seconded by Mr. Clark. At this point, if there's no discussion, I will put it to a vote. So all those in favor of this application, please raise your hand. And the vote is unanimous. Ms. Brown, good luck with your new project. Thank you. I want to say hi to Dr. Clark. I'm a proud UK Music School graduate. I knew that. I didn't know that. Good to see you again. Thank you all very much. A much needed mission in Lexington. Absolutely. Thank you, ma'am. Okay, so we are now through our uncontested cases. That took us two hours to get through, but we're making progress. We're getting there. So I appreciate those in the public who have stayed with us and your patience. I am now going to call the case on page three, number five, which is PLNBOA 20-51. Sarah and Matthew Campbell if we could bring Mr. Campbell back up. Okay and then if you were in the public, Randall and Veronica you could just raise your hands we will give you an opportunity to speak in a few minutes. Mr. Campbell, if you could turn on your camera and unmute yourself real quickly. Good afternoon, sir. The staff has recommended disapproval today, but before we get into allowing everyone an opportunity to speak on this application, if you could state your name for the record. Matt Campbell. Good afternoon, Mr. Campbell, and if you could confirm, were you sworn in earlier? Yep, that was me. All right, perfect. So what we're going to do is you can sit tight. Since this is a recommendation of disapproval, I'm going to allow the staff to give us a report on this application. Once the staff is completed with their report, I will then allow you to present your case. and then once you present your case, I will then allow the public to give their comments on this application. And then once that is completed, I'll let Autumn do a very quick rebuttal, and they'll allow you to do a very quick rebuttal. We'll then close the applications or this hearing of your case to the public. We then may have additional questions, et cetera, as we go forward. So with all that being said, if we could mute Mr. Campbell and then let Autumn proceed. Mr. Chair, I see in the chat box that one of the board members has requested a quick break. Oh, yes, I did not see that in the chat box. Yes, before we have this case heard, whoever needs it, it's five minutes adequate. You don't need to tell me. It is, just tell me if it's not. Okay, we will recess for five minutes and they will come right back. And the rear yard behind the house could be as close as 18 inches to the side lot line. um go on through here the current shed is just under the required square footage minimum for requiring a building permit that's 200 feet so it's just a little bit under that um and since the property is within the historic district overlay um any construction is subject to review by the board of architectural review and the applicant did go through that process and then the shed was approved. However, the setback was not addressed in that application. So the applicant has replaced an existing non-conforming structure. You can see that original structure here with the white roof. They have constructed a taller and larger structure so that is what has triggered the need for this to meet the side yard setback requirements of the zoning ordinance. If they replace the structure with an identical structure. It could have been located in this location, but since they have constructed a larger structure, that's triggered the need for it to make to be compliant with the zoning ordinance requirements. So this application came to us due to a complaint by the next door neighbor. They reported that the structure was too close to the fence and was resulting in damage to their fence from stormwater runoff. You can see here that this is the existing structure relative to the fence line. There's another view from the adjacent property. Hey Autumn, to orientate myself to where we are, what is that adjacent property? It looks like a parking wall. Oh, here we go. This is the subject property here. The adjacent property here, the fence line is right along the property. Oh, the townhouses. These are townhouses. Okay, all right, I know exactly where we are. Okay. With the serpentine wall along the place. Yep. Yep, so and you can see here in the aerial, here's the shed. So staff has recommended disapproval of this application for three reasons. The first is that the shed has been constructed with an angled roof which directs the water runoff directly onto the adjacent property's fence and that's resulted in damage to the fence due to the close proximity of the roof overhang. It appears that the structure itself may be two feet from the property line but the overhang actually appears to be probably a little bit closer to that property line. So the variance probably would actually need to be for the overhang distance. Additionally, there are not special circumstances that are unique to this property that justify the need for the variance. As we talked about, it is a considerably larger property than what we typically see in the infill area. When the shed, the original shed was at this location, it was shorter and had a much smaller footprint and was less likely to cause damage to the neighboring property. Strict application of the zoning ordinance would not deprive the applicant of reasonable use their land as there's plenty of room in the rear yard behind the house to fit the shed or a shed of this size. It could be relocated back there. So those are the reasons that we have recommended disapproval. I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. Thank you, Autumn. Does anyone on the panel want to see any of these slides a little bit more or should we stop share? Okay, we can stop share. Before I ask the applicant to testify, does anyone have any questions of honor at this time? Okay, hearing none. Then I guess, Mr. Campbell, we will now bring you up. Unmute you so you can give your presentation. Yes, hello. Thank you. Basically, like Autumn said, we decided to replace this structure. It was in bad shape when we moved into this location, and we built upon it to accommodate our ride-on mower, not realizing that a structure that was already in place was in any violation. to her initial points about the water runoff. In the meantime, we have retrofitted a gutter system. I've actually cut that roof back and retrofitted a gutter system with two downspouts on it. So I don't believe that the water should be considered an issue anymore. um there's there's going to be no water getting on that fence as a result to our uh new build um and the aerial images that autumn just kind of shared uh are from prior to um that addition of the uh the downspout so it looks closer um to the fence than it currently is um the second point the the actual structure is is still smaller than would be required for a any kind of permit that would have been required in order to build it being under 200 square feet so the fact that it's larger I don't think should be considered an issue and the only the special circumstance I can I can say at this point for requesting that it's not required to be moved is that there's a utility pole in our backyard there I'm not sure if you could see it from that that overhead image again but there's utility pole there which makes it very difficult to move this structure at this point so the third point I just wanted to kind of, it's almost a question. I just want to know, like it's considered side yard where it currently is. And the setback is eight feet. But just, just based on the other structures in our neighborhood, there's, there's a bunch of garages, for instance, that are basically on property line on the street alone. And if that's considered backyard, then I think that a request for this variance in this location is reasonable because even if we were to put the shed in the backyard, it could be even closer to the fence if it's based on these other individual structures, if they're in compliance with the law. Let's really all have at this point, we're just hoping that there's some leniency in this scenario. We love the shed. Again, we need the storage for our lawn equipment since we don't have a garage. And if the damage to that fence is considered to be due to the fact that that structure is there, I personally don't believe that because the entire fence is relatively old all the way to Nicholasville Road. But I'm more than willing to replace those boards and make that fence brand new and go from there if that is something that that would appease the our neighbors. Thank you sir. I can't speak to the other structures of what you are discussing but a lot of times in these older neighborhoods there are existing non-conforming structures. I know for example I live next to Lafayette High School and my garage is built pretty much on the property line. There may be six or eight inches of land but that that that often happened in some of these older areas but since then the zoning ordinance has been changed and so you can't rely upon the fact that there's an existing non-conforming structure to justify your new non-conforming structure but just want to put that point out there um does anyone have any questions for the applicant at this time mr campbell uh this is is tommy glover uh how far is that existing shed itself from the property line uh the body of the shed is two feet exactly um i don't i don't have the number on me i could run out there and check but the um where the gutter is currently it's it's probably uh i'd say six inches past that so just just over a foot and a half i guess from the fence line do you have any images or pictures photographs of that guttering system. Yep, Autumn had that up earlier. I sent that to her on Friday, so she has it in her slide deck. It's available in the Google Drive, if maybe you, Brandon, could share that. Yes, about me, Brandon. Tracy, Stephanie. Tracy. Thank you. All I've got is a pad of paper. under your name so you're responsible yeah i appreciate it yeah it was that yeah that first image or the the one that was previously up is a great example it's right down fence line so that that fence is actually in much much worse shape uh in the front of our property so So that's the only reason I disputed the fact that it's water damage that's causing the fence to be old. And like I said, if it will appease the neighbors, I'm more than happy to replace that section of fence and make it brand new. It looks to me like you have cut back the overhang from the pictures that we saw earlier. Yep. You instead installed this guttering system. Yes. Does the gutter catch all the water that runs off that roof towards the side yard? To tell you the truth, I did not stand out there in these storms we had over the weekend, but I'm confident that it's installed correctly and it's doing its job as designed. You said there was a pre-existing shed. Do you have any images or pictures, photographs of the pre-existing shed? The best I've seen is again in this slide deck that Autumn pulled up earlier. She zoomed in. So right there you can see the utility pole that is six feet or so in front of the shed, making it basically impossible for me to move the shed to the backyard at this point. That's my, to point B, that's my special circumstances that I'm hoping can be taken into consideration. and if you go further in the slide deck whoever's running it there was an overhead picture where you could see the the pre-existing structure or the the old shed those were not photos you provided I was just showing the two that you had submitted yeah that was the best that I had I can pull up the aerial again if you would like yeah let's do that So here's the photo of the original structure. Okay. What happened to that pre-existing shed? I initially, when we, after we were settled in, I was going to refurbish it, I guess, but it's ended up being too dilapidated. So we incorporated the footers into this new shed, but majority of those materials ended up being trash. Okay. So the old shed did have footers? It was anchored in the ground, yes. Okay. So I essentially built a deck off those anchors and then added a couple more feet at the front of the shed now and then built upon that. So it's a refurbishment. It's not an entirely new build, but the majority of it is new materials. the uh utility pole that you're talking about that's just uh just west of the shed is that right correct yeah okay and i'm not um i'm not going to claim to be the most knowledgeable about um about the way that these things are zoned and how that works backyard versus side yard but if that were to be on the other side of that pole in the exact same location would would that be fine is that is that acceptable because it would be considered backyard at that point it would have to be entirely behind your house so beyond including the addition here so it's it's more of a principal scenario like it could be this the rear yard is defined as as being behind the rear wall plane of the house. Anything that is to the side of the house is considered side yard. Okay, but in the backyard it could be that close to the fence? Correct. Okay. But you still aren't permitted to have storm water on from your property to spill over onto another parcel? Yeah, no, absolutely. That was my mistake and that's That's why I retrofitted the gutter system. And like I said, that picture you're currently looking at, it's actually further back from that now, following fence line. I saw the gutter system that you installed, and I saw the one downspout. But the other, does one of them, the drainage from the downspout run through the fence? I put it through the fence because that grass there under that tree doesn't get enough water. If that's an issue, I could fix that. I think the point is it's being discharged on your property, just the front yard. Absolutely. Okay. And I could extend those pipes and put them as far away as we need from the neighbor's property. Can we go back and look at the guttering system again? Yeah, I can share that. I think this is what Ms. Whitman mentioned. The gutter appears to go into the fence. It's the angle that it goes in that I was concerned about, and I really don't know from the picture, but it looked like it was pointed back toward the neighbor's fence. That's a flexible pipe. So it bends back towards my tree just on the other side of that fence. And again, I'm more than happy to extend it. Thank you. the old shed or was this a brand new shed? I would consider it to be a renovation. Like I said, though, the vast majority of the materials are new and I did extend the footprints. I mean, there's no doubt about that, but it was built upon the original structure. So Autumn, if this is a retrofit, I don't know how the ordinance reads, but is a reconditioning of a non-conforming structure, is it required to stay in the same footprint? Is that the problem with this? It looks like the... Any enlargement will trigger the requirements of the zoning ordinance. So with a non-conforming structure, you can replace it with a non-conforming structure that is within the exact same footprint. Okay, so that's the main issue as we see it right now. Okay. Any more questions from the applicant? We can bring him back after we get the opportunity to hear from the citizens that are on. So we'll go ahead and mute Mr. Campbell. And then let's give Mr. Bear an opportunity to speak. Mr. Barrett, are you there? Yes, I am. Good afternoon. Quickly, for the record, if you could, could you confirm I swore you in earlier today? Yes, you did. And then could you state your name for the record? My name is Virgil Randall Barrett. Thank you, sir. And at this point, we'll give you a few minutes to give us your opinion on this application. I appreciate the fact that he's dealt with the water coming off the his existing roof, but there's also a footer and foundation system that's there. That's that's actually his property, I believe, is about 18 inches lower than our property. And so there's a foundation that we have to to consider with water. also the site plan that was was presented and the information that he gave us was not by a licensed surveyor so we have no way of knowing where he's put his building whether it's on the property line or 18 inches off two foot off typically whenever a new fence is put on a piece of property such as the homeowners association's fence it is put on our property. So if he's measuring from the fence to his building and saying there's two foot, it's not really two foot to the property line. That's all I have to say. We, the board, I am the president of the Homeowners Association board, and we did meet, and the board has said that we want to make sure that his building is not on our property and that he deals with the water and as long as he deals with those two things we're okay with it. Okay thank you Mr. Barrett. We will mute you unless it wait before we mute him does anyone have any questions for Mr. Barrett while we have him? Mr. Barrett where is your property line with respect to that fence? We need to put him back to be able to talk. but we brought you back uh mr barrett's you can now let me there we go that i am not sure of because i just own one of the condos in that uh in those in that complex does the neighborhood association have a plan of the property or or does the neighborhood association know where property line is no we would have to get a surveyor out ourselves okay any additional questions i just wanted to point out that uh regardless of how this turns out if we approve or disapprove uh the actions of the board doesn't grant any property rights to anybody to encroach on your property. Correct. Okay. Mr. Barrett, we will now demote you. Vernique is not on the line right now. Well, okay. She's shown as an attendee, so we don't need to bring her up. Is that what you're saying? No, you don't. Okay, thank you, sir. I appreciate that. And Bernique, if for some reason that's not true, please raise your hand and we will allow you an opportunity to speak. Okay, so at this point, it looks like we've heard from the public, we've heard from the applicant and staff. Autumn, if you could, any points you want us to consider before I close this and we start deliberating? i'm just happy to answer any questions you have about what i've said so far thank you ma'am that's sweet i love it uh mr campbell uh do you have anything else you want the board to consider um i just i just want to thank uh mr barrett for his words um and in by no means do we want to be on his property i i'm thankful he's appreciative about the water issue we've taken care of. And if it takes for us to get a surveyor out here to ensure that we're not on their property, obviously, I'm happy to do that. Like I said, I'm happy to fix the fence. And if it's just his property, if that's the bottom line, I mean, I can move it. I can move the fence in. I can move the entire building inward if I had to, if it was in violation in an issue, but it's the eight feet that is going to be difficult just based on the amount of space there. So if there's a minimum amount I can move it, I think I could put it right up to my house and move it five feet off property line. That would be a little bit extreme maybe based on, I'm just willing to make adjustments as necessary to in order to appease everybody. Thank you, sir. Autumn real quickly, do you think that there is opportunity for the town homeowners and Mr. Campbell and staff to come to an arrangement on the location of this shed given the fact that there was an existing one there? I think that that's something that the board needs to decide. Boo. Okay, well in that case, thank you Mr. Campbell for your words. I'll now close this. We can mute him. So the board has heard the testimony today. So at this point we'll open up for discussions if we want to ask any of the attendees for additional information. We can or to confirm that they're willing to do certain actions as part of the approval. we can do that too. So it's now open for your guys' deliberations. I've got another question for Mr. Campbell, if you could unmute yourself. How far is it from eight feet from your property line to the side of your house? uh um i'd have to go measure there's so there's definitely eight feet there but the with the the width of the structure i couldn't get the edge of the structure eight eight full feet from the fence i could get it to five oh i see if i put if i put it right next to my house what i what you're what i hear you saying is if you move that shed right next to your house it would still intrude on the setback another three feet. Is that right? Correct. Yeah. And like I said, there's a tree on one side and there's a pole on the other side. If I get denied completely with no ability to make adjustments, I'll be heartbroken. It's a beautiful shed. well the reason i reason i asked you that question i hate to i don't know what you spent to build the shed i hate to see you tear it down and use it for lumber or something like that but if it could be moved and if that's a viable uh option i i would be i wouldn't be opposed to the suggestion to move it back off your property line so that it only encroaches three feet into that eight foot space. That's just my personal feelings about it. Okay. I guess in that case, let me, Mr. Barrett, we can promote Mr. Barrett. I want to get the neighbors. Mr. Barrett, I know you guys said that if there were adjustments made to its location, if it were to be moved to the side of the house to where there was five feet from your fence line to the edge of the, to the edge of your, to the shed, and if the water was all being discharged onto Mr. Campbell's property, would the condo association or townhouse association, would they be agreeable to that solution? We wouldn't have any problems with that. As I said before, all we want is to make sure that it's not on our property and to make sure that the water is handled correctly. So moving it adjacent to his house is fine with us. That's up to the board. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Barrett. Okay. Now I will say, I don't, Mr. Glover, I'm not sure which way you're leaning. I'm still not convinced that there are any special circumstances here, but I'd like to hear your opinion on that. Well, I don't disagree with you, Brandon. I think you're right. I guess my thinking is that if there was a shed there before that was non-conforming, but it was pre-existing. And if he built off that shed and just increased the footprint of it, I don't have a problem with that. If it encroaches on his neighbor or is close to his neighbor's property, I do have a problem with that. So I was looking for a way to solve the problem without denying the request. And my thought was, if we decrease the minimum required side yard setback from eight feet to something like five feet or whatever that measurement is that would allow him to move that shed back to his house, I could go along with that. And that would be the easiest changed his request. In other words, just change that two to whatever the mathematical number is, and I don't know what that is. He says it's, let's see, if it encroaches three feet, it would be five feet. So if you change that two feet to five feet, then I could support this application. Otherwise, it won't. Okay. All right. And we can't hear you, Harry. Harry, you mean you didn't? Yeah, there we go. I would say the compromise would be going from eight to four feet. That would give Mr. Campbell a little bit of room without having to move it up right against the house. I think that would be fair to both parties. I agree with you, Harry. Yeah. I agree, too, and still with the condition that the water be turned away from his neighbor's property. Okay, well, let me ask the staff this. It looks like we're, you know, there's, I still, four people still haven't spoken. I'm not sure I would agree with the compromised position, just because I'm not sure that I'm convinced or special circumstances, but assuming this is the way it's going to go, wouldn't you prefer to have a site plan that shows where it's going to be located, show these modifications as part of our approval that says, you know, this is where it's going to be located, etc.? I think we could formulate the findings and conditions to pretty specifically state where it had to be for the sake of getting this done today. But if you would prefer there to be a site plan on record, we could continue this to next month. I think that's up to you. Yeah, I'll let the proponents, if you think you can pull it off, I have full faith in you. I don't have to pull it off. So related to Ms. Carter, Mr. Walker, and Needham, like I said, I probably will not support the motion, but do you guys want to allow Mr. Glover time to formulate findings of facts and conditions for a motion to approve um yeah this is Chad Neenam I'm fine with that I think um you know as long as I like working out a deal with the neighbor unfortunately it got to this but uh you know I like as long as he can show that the shed's not on their property I think he's dealt with the water so uh whatever the easiest way is to get him to keep the shed I'm fine with. Okay well in that case then I'll take a 10 minute recess and let Mr. Glover and Tracy Jones and Autumn work their magic and we'll be back in 10. Thanks guys. Hmm. Thank you. He won the Commerce Minority Business Award this year. Oh, that's right. I did see that in the business focus. We were actually on my Zoom for the presentation, so I had to switch it from my picture to his. I felt nice. I'll give him a little cub for a little while. I don't know if I'm brave enough to go to your movie fest this year. You're in the car. Come on now. I'm going to talk to Alexis about it. Okay. Lex TV, we look like we are ready with the panel. Whenever you let us know when we're back. You're on the air, sir. Go right ahead. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for your patience today. I think Mr. Glover is ready to report what he wants to report. Mr. Chair, I move to approve the PLN BOA 20-51, Sarah and Matthew Campbell's request to decrease the minimum required side yard setback from 8 feet to 4 feet to allow the 10 by 19 foot accessory structure to be relocated within the side yard based on the following reasons. Number one, that the relocated shed won't adversely affect public health, safety, or welfare if it is further from the lot line and proper water runoff controls are in place. Number two, that relocation of the shed will allow the applicant to work around the utility pole in his yard and still maintain the shed. and based on the following three conditions number one resubmitting a site plan with changes to planning reflecting those changes number two consult with building inspection to determine and comply with any building codes or ordinances and number three implement proper water control so that there is no water runoff to adjacent properties thank you mr glover before i ask for a second. Mr. Campbell, did you hear those conditions? If you wouldn't mind repeating the second condition, so I have that correct. Sure. The second condition is consult with building inspection to determine and comply with any building codes or ordinances. Okay. Are those agreeable to you, Mr. Campbell? Yes. All right. Thank you, sir. You can be yourself again. So we have a motion on the floor. Is there a second to Mr. Glover's motion? Second. Mr. Clark has seconded. At this point, any discussion on the motion before I ask for a vote? Hearing none, I will call for a vote. So if you support the application based upon Mr. Glover's motion, the findings that were read, and the three conditions. Please vote in the affirmative by raising your hand. I see Clark, Glover, Walker, Needham, Whitman, and Carter. Thank you very much. I'm voting in opposing the motion, so the motion carries. Good luck with your project, Mr. Campbell, and get with Autumn, and she'll get you with the right people, at the building inspection to make sure that you have what you need. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, so the last case of the day, Mr. Doug is back. So let's promote him. There he is. And then I don't believe, but just to make sure, Is there anyone else on the telephone call, any attendees who want to speak to this application? Okay. I figure I just want to make sure, you know, never, never sure. So, okay, perfect. Okay. So let's, Doug, if you could unmute yourself. Are you there? Yes, sir. If you could, once again, state your name for the record. I'm Doug Vescio. And if you could confirm you were sworn in earlier? I believe so, yes. Okay, thank you, sir. And this is a continuation of our hearing from last month in which we had a lot of discussion, a lot of testimony. The staff has recommended approval based upon three conditions, and you wanted to get some clarification for those conditions. So, what is the opportunity? I don't really have any problem with any of this, but I talked to Autumn, I think last week, I believe. And the question I had is, there is one, I'm assuming that the work that you all want is behind my existing office. It's not putting up a six-foot fence around the entire property, the front and everything. It's because it's already thin-stead in the back. That was the first question. If I can maybe clarify a little bit, in condition number three, we're asking for a five-foot average buffer area to be provided along the side lot lines for adjacent to the proposed storage building, extending to and including the rear lot line. Okay. It would be behind your current building. It would be along the sides of the new building and extending to the rear. Okay. And then I can show you some pictures, but 80% of the property has a six-foot fence around it. I think I discussed with you the area where the housing, public housing is, there's a double fence. There was a fence we already had, and then they put up a four- or five-foot fence. and that whole area is thick with trees. In fact, I spent about $10,000 last fall cutting the property back because it was so wide, and it's already grown back. So my question is, I don't have a problem planting, you know, some trees back there where they need to go, but I guess I was hoping that someone could come out and say, this is good enough or it's thick enough for the fences that are already there are sufficient because I'd hate to double up on the fencing. I'd like to clarify, he doesn't have to replace six-foot fence. He just needs to add a supplement in areas that it's missing. There needs to be six-foot fencing along that area we just talked about from behind the existing or behind the proposed structure to and including the rear lot line so my my question would probably be whether or not the existing fences were all tied in together if it was a continuous fence or if some of it's your fence and some of it's a neighbor's fence right and whether those are all tied in i think we would want to see a continuous fencing um but you know it would not be replacing any existing fencing it would just be supplementing to ensure that we have a continuous six-foot fence around that area and i don't have any problem when I say a problem it's none of it's a problem the only two concerns I have and I wish I could get someone to come out here um back in the very back lot we've got uh there's a there's a six foot fence uh behind the retaining walls that we have back there and young children get I don't know how they get up but somehow or another they climb up over that i don't know if it's because it's six foot on my side and three foot on their side because it's a hill um i'd be even willing to put a some more fence back there i just don't think my neighbors uh would appreciate having uh so i guess i just would like some guidance i don't mind doing the fence or adding some fence the fence on the left hand side is so thick I'd have to cut most of the trees and shrubs down on my property and the neighbor's property to probably get a fence in there so I guess I'm just wanting I'm not for lack of a better phrase I'm not arguing or trying to get it I just would like for you all to say hey what's what's best for the situation is that okay I think to clarify with the retaining wall we would be looking at for six feet including that retaining wall so i'm not saying you have to construct a six foot fence on top of the retaining wall um if that helps no what i know what i'm what i'm saying there's there's a six foot fence behind that now but somehow some of these young people are getting over it i don't know how they're doing that so my question is i i wouldn't mind trying to do something to prevent that but i would like you're all's guidance, and I hope you appreciate that, but tell me aesthetically it would look good or maybe it wouldn't be safe to add an eight-foot fence up there. I don't know. I just want some help there. In that location along your rear lot line, you would be permitted to have an eight-foot fence. All we're asking for is the six-foot fence for screening and offering purposes, but if you were to install an eight-foot fence, I think that that would be in the spirit of our recommendation, and an eight-foot fence is allowed in that location. Does it matter if it's chain link or wood because the wood fences seem to be getting knocked out? In fact, we had a fire on one side. Does it matter what type of fence? We did not specify in our condition. Okay. Well, then I'm good with this as long as you're okay with me not having to put a brand new fence to supplement what's already there. as long as I have to, we agree that, you know, if the fence gets torn down or if something's bad, we'll put a fence up or if we want to add to a certain area, as long as there's separation. And again, I think I told you earlier, I think we're going to widen our buffer on the side of the building to be able to get in there and do some maintenance so that the five foot is great, but we'll probably end up going 10 feet anyway. And that's fine. The five foot would be a minimum, so the additional would be fine with us. Well, I'm good with all this from what I can tell. If that's what you need. And then the only other question, Autumn, is there are trees and shrubs down through there. If I need to add more trees, I'm more than glad to add some trees. But if down at least the first half of the back lot, in fact, I could show you if you want me to pull a picture in. I mean, it's plenty thick. So I don't know if I need to add trees in those areas or not or just the bare areas. What you'll need to do most likely is consult with the Division of Landscape Environmental Services. and they will be able to tell you about that planning manual with the type A and D trees and the requirement for one every 40 feet to ensure that you're meeting that. You may be able to utilize some of your existing trees if they happen to be the types of trees that fall into category A or B. Sure. Okay. So it's just trees, not shrubbery, right? Correct. Trees. Okay. Okay. Well, I'm good with this. perfect um in that case do we since he since mr uh doug has agreed to the uh three conditions so we have a motion on the floor yeah i'm i'm kind of i'm kind of interested in in the uh and curious the way that the staff report has I guess justified calling this a plant nursery when it's not in fact a plant nursery that's really my only comment and I applaud you on your creative use of the language to get there and I think I understand Autumn how you got there for my future reference but you might explain that just for the listening public because I think it's really interesting. We're certainly relying on the history of the project a lot in this instance that it was originally classified as a plant nursery back in the very early 90s. At that time, the definition of plant nursery was different than what it is today and where plant nursery was permitted was different than where it is today. So at that time in 1992, the applicant received a certificate of occupancy for a plant nursery, but what he really is doing is more like a landscaping business, what we would consider today, but at that time it was, it fell into that definition of plant nursery, and then they received the certificate of occupancy. A plant nursery later became a conditional use in the AU zone, and so the way that that works when something becomes a conditional use, if it already is existing in that zone and has a certificate of occupancy, it becomes grandfathered in essentially as a conditional use without going before you all. So that's, that's what happened here is that they have a conditional use for what was then a plant nursery. So today whenever Mr. Messia is coming back to us to expand that use, we honored that even though this is not a use that if it were to be started today would be permitted in this zone because it would be something that we would consider a landscaping business which sort of falls into our shops of specialty trade category which would be allowed in a B4 zone most typically rather than the AU zone. Does that explain it? I think that's great. I appreciate the I appreciate the explanation. Thank you. I lost somebody. Hold on. Can you all hear me because I lost you here? Yeah we can hear you. Oh there. Any more questions or anything or does anyone want to make a motion? Mr. Chair I'll move. Approval of PLN BOA 20-42, Doug Bessio, requesting a conditional use for a plant nursery in order to construct a new building at an existing plant nursery in an agricultural urban zone and property located at 901 Old Todd's Road, based on the staff's recommendation and subject to the three conditions as listed. Thank you, sir. So, Mr. Clark has made a motion. Ms. Whitman has seconded that motion. Any discussion on it? All right, hearing none, that I would put it to a vote. Please raise your hand if you're voting in the affirmative. And that is unanimous. Good luck with your project, sir. Thank you. When can I, I guess, just get the permits out and start and get all that together and bring them on down? Is that what I need to do at this point? Yep, you'll need to get in touch with building inspection to get a building permit. They may need to talk to me about whether or not you've been through this process. and I will be happy to confirm that you have it. Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate you guys and girls. Thank you. Bye-bye. So that concludes our for the day. I think these may be the originals. Okay. Let's leave those with you. All right. Board items. Does anyone, any board members have anything they want to bring to our attention? perfect um then we've got don't forget some of us uh have uh training today i mean this month so that's coming up is that what you're talking about yes sir all right hal's going to talk to you about that in a few minutes um we do have our schedule for 2021 staff has distributed that um showing the dates that we would have our hearings next year it'd be similar to this year where Columbus and Indigenous Day, Indigenous People Days would be the only date that we have a conflict with any kind of holiday through the year. I'm assuming the schedule is good for everybody and somebody would be willing to make a motion to approve it. But is there any discussion before we do that? Okay, Ms. Carter, are you making a motion? Because I see your mouth moving, but I can't hear you. I'm just singing a song. I make a motion that we approve the schedule as presented for 2021. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have a second? Ms. Whitman is raising her hand in the second. All those in favor, please raise your hands. All right. We are actually early this year. I think the last two years we've done in December, which was Jim Marks was not a fan waiting that long. Okay, so now we're going to open it up for staff. Hal's going to have some things to talk to us about. Good morning, everyone, or good evening at this point. Everyone, I just wanted to reiterate that there is training for you all on October 23rd. It will be starting at 830 in the morning and running until 5 p.m. That will give you eight hours worth of training. Some of you are up against your needed time. so this is one way to quickly knock it out and not have to worry about it so I don't want to mention names but there are at least a few of you up here who we haven't heard from so I think he already contacted us saying that he was coming I haven't already contacted you easy there no no we've got you on the list right now Chad I appreciate it That is a great way to get your credits done. Mr. Pike will be here. For those who would like to be in the building, you are welcome to come. We will be adhering to the CDC's guidelines. We will also be showing this on Zoom and we will send out that link here soon. So we look forward to seeing you there. Just so you guys know, it'll be on the third floor, right? Yes, it will. It'll be on the third floor in the multi-use room. Your badges do not work to get in the building, so when you get here you'll need just to knock on the door and tell security you're going to the third floor for this presentation. And we'll have someone down on the first floor to give you the right act about what you need to do before you come in. Make sure that you have a mask and all the things that you might need. So we'll be sending out...