# Board of Adjustment Hearing - October 10, 2022 > Auto-transcribed civic record · October 10, 2022 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/5654 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/5654?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2022-10-10 - **Last revised**: October 10, 2022 - **Length**: 31,500 words - **Speakers**: Reporter, Here Is One Example > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Board of Adjustment convened on October 10, 2022, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Raquel Carter presiding as the meeting officer. The board addressed five agenda items during the session, including variance requests and conditional use permits for various applicants throughout the city. The meeting featured active public participation, with five public comments heard from community members regarding the proposed applications. The board conducted seven motions and votes throughout the proceedings, ultimately approving four of the five applications presented. One conditional use permit application from Independence Bank was tabled for future consideration, while variance requests for Travis Ison and Isaac Blanford were both approved, along with conditional use permits for Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation and Lauren Gilbert. ## Attendance The following individuals were present at the meeting on October 10, 2022: **Present:** • Raquel Carter • Harry Clarke • Branden Gross • Carolyn Plumlee • Linda Tucker • Chad Walker • Tracy Jones • Brittany Smith • Stephen Parker • Traci Wade • Autumn Goderwis • Meghan Jennings • Donna Lewis All expected attendees were present for the meeting. No absences or late arrivals were recorded. ## Votes and Decisions The board took action on seven items during the October 10, 2022 meeting, with all decisions made unanimously by the seven-member board. **Postponements** The board postponed three items at the meeting. PLN-BOA-22-00047, Kim Bragg's conditional use request for drive-through facilities, was postponed on a motion by Branden Gross, seconded by Harry Clarke [timestamp: 10:00]. PLN-BOA-22-00050, Redwood Cooperative School's request to amend conditional use, was also postponed on a motion by Branden Gross, seconded by Chad Walker [timestamp: 15:00]. Finally, PLN-BOA-22-00045, Independence Bank's request for drive-through facilities, was continued on a motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Branden Gross [timestamp: 3:30:00]. **Variance Approvals** Two variance requests for front yard setback reductions were approved unanimously. PLN-BOA-22-00048, Travis Ison's variance request, passed on a motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Carolyn Plumlee, with the condition that construction proceed in accordance with submitted application materials and site plan [timestamp: 30:00]. PLN-BOA-22-00049, Isaac Blanford's similar variance request, was approved on a motion by Carolyn Plumlee, seconded by Harry Clarke, with identical conditions [timestamp: 35:00]. **Conditional Use Permits** The board approved two conditional use permits. PLN-BOA-22-00033, Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation's request, passed on a motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Chad Walker, with conditions limiting occupancy to 18 beds and restricting social activities to after 5:00 p.m. or weekends [timestamp: 1:20:00]. PLN-BOA-22-00046, Lauren Gilbert's home-based medical consulting business, was approved on a motion by Chad Needham, seconded by Linda Tucker, with the condition that operations follow submitted application materials and site plan [timestamp: 2:00:00]. All votes were 7-0, with board members Raquel Carter, Harry Clarke, Branden Gross, Carolyn Plumlee, Linda Tucker, and Chad Walker voting in favor of each motion. ## Public Comment Five residents addressed the board during the public comment period, raising concerns about three main issues: fraternity house impacts, home-based business traffic, and downtown drive-through safety. **Fraternity House Concerns** Blake Standafer spoke first, expressing concerns about trash, noise, and potential crime associated with fraternity houses [timestamp: 1:00:00]. Amy Clark followed with additional concerns about parking, access, and the overall impact on the neighborhood from the proposed fraternity house [timestamp: 1:05:00]. **Home-Based Business Traffic** Zachary O'Connor opposed a proposed home-based business, citing concerns about potential increased traffic on Walton Avenue [timestamp: 2:10:00]. **Drive-Through Safety and Appropriateness** Two speakers addressed concerns about a proposed drive-through facility in the downtown area. Clay Collier expressed concerns about pedestrian safety and questioned whether a drive-through was appropriate for the downtown location [timestamp: 3:00:00]. Amy Clark also spoke against the drive-through proposal, citing conflicts with both pedestrian and vehicular traffic and expressing concerns about the impact on the Town Branch Commons [timestamp: 3:10:00]. The public comments focused primarily on neighborhood compatibility issues, with residents emphasizing concerns about traffic safety, parking impacts, and maintaining the character of their respective areas. ## Contested Items Two agenda items faced significant community opposition during the October 10, 2022 meeting, leading to extended discussion and debate. **Independence Bank Drive-Through Facilities** The proposed drive-through facilities for Independence Bank generated considerable controversy among community members. Residents raised specific concerns about pedestrian safety in the downtown area, questioning whether drive-through operations would create hazardous conditions for foot traffic. Additionally, opponents argued that drive-through facilities were inappropriate for the downtown setting, potentially conflicting with the area's character and urban design goals. The level of community opposition was substantial enough that the board decided not to proceed with a final decision during the meeting. Instead, the item was continued to allow for further discussion and consideration of the safety and appropriateness concerns raised by residents. **Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta Fraternity House** The fraternity house proposal for Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta also drew significant community opposition. Residents voiced multiple concerns about the potential impacts of establishing a fraternity house in their neighborhood. The primary issues raised included: • Noise concerns related to fraternity activities and gatherings • Trash and waste management problems that might affect the surrounding area • Parking issues that could impact neighborhood streets and availability for residents Community members who spoke against the proposal expressed worry that these issues would negatively affect their quality of life and neighborhood conditions. The opposition appeared to stem from experiences or expectations about typical fraternity house operations and their effects on residential areas. Both contested items highlighted tensions between development proposals and community concerns about neighborhood impacts, safety, and character preservation. The strong community turnout and vocal opposition on these matters demonstrated significant resident engagement in local planning decisions. ## Variance for Travis Ison [timestamp: 30:00] The Board of Adjustment reviewed case PLN-BOA-22-00048, a variance request for Travis Ison to reduce the required front yard setback from 300 feet to 150 feet for a single-family home. Samuel Ison spoke on behalf of the application, presenting the case for the variance request. The proposal would allow construction of a single-family residence with a front yard setback of 150 feet rather than the standard 300-foot requirement. Following the presentation and board discussion, the variance request was approved, allowing the reduced setback for the proposed residential construction. ## Variance for Isaac Blanford [timestamp: 35:00] The Board of Appeals considered case PLN-BOA-22-00049, a variance request submitted by Isaac Blanford to reduce the required front yard setback from 300 feet to 230 feet for a single-family home. Isaac Blanford presented his request to the board, seeking approval to build his residence with a reduced setback of 70 feet from the standard requirement. The variance would allow the home to be positioned 230 feet from the front property line rather than the mandated 300 feet. The board reviewed the application and supporting materials for the single-family home project. The discussion centered on whether the reduced setback would meet the criteria for granting a variance while maintaining compatibility with the surrounding area and zoning requirements. After consideration of the request and any public input, the Board of Appeals approved the variance for Isaac Blanford. The approval allows construction of the single-family home to proceed with the reduced front yard setback of 230 feet, representing a 70-foot reduction from the standard 300-foot requirement established in the zoning code. ## Conditional Use for Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation [timestamp: 1:20:00] The board reviewed application PLN-BOA-22-00033, a request by the Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation for a conditional use permit to operate an 18-bed fraternity house in a High Density Apartment zone. Richard Murphy served as the key speaker presenting the application to the board. The proposal involves establishing a fraternity house facility that would accommodate 18 residents within the designated zoning district. The conditional use permit was necessary because fraternity houses require special approval when located in High Density Apartment zones, even though such residential uses may be compatible with the area's character and density requirements. The board ultimately **approved** the conditional use permit for the Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation, allowing the fraternity to proceed with their plans for the 18-bed facility. *Note: Detailed discussion points, specific concerns raised by board members, and conditions attached to the approval were not available in the provided source materials.* ## Conditional Use for Lauren Gilbert [timestamp: 2:00:00] The Board of Adjustment considered application PLN-BOA-22-00046, a request by Lauren Gilbert for a conditional use permit to operate a home-based concierge medical consulting business. • **Applicant**: Lauren Gilbert • **Application Number**: PLN-BOA-22-00046 • **Request**: Conditional use permit for home-based concierge medical consulting business Lauren Gilbert presented her application to the board, seeking approval to operate a medical consulting business from her residence. The proposed concierge medical consulting service would be conducted as a home-based business under the conditional use provisions. The board reviewed the application materials and heard Gilbert's presentation regarding the nature of her proposed business operations. The discussion focused on how the home-based medical consulting service would comply with zoning requirements and conditional use standards. **Outcome**: The Board of Adjustment approved the conditional use permit for Lauren Gilbert's home-based concierge medical consulting business. The approval allows Gilbert to proceed with operating her medical consulting service from her residence under the terms and conditions established by the conditional use permit. ## Conditional Use for Independence Bank The Board of Adjustment considered agenda item PLN-BOA-22-00045, a request for a conditional use permit to establish drive-through facilities for a proposed Independence Bank location [timestamp: 3:30:00]. Sean Spalding served as the key speaker presenting the conditional use application. The request specifically sought approval for drive-through banking facilities as part of the proposed bank development. Following discussion of the application, the Board ultimately decided to table the conditional use request rather than approve or deny it at this meeting. The tabling action indicates that additional information, review, or consideration may be needed before the Board can make a final determination on the Independence Bank drive-through facilities proposal. No additional details about specific concerns raised, conditions discussed, or reasons for tabling the item were available from the meeting materials reviewed. --- ## Decisions - **PLN-BOA-22-00047** — postponed (7-0): Postponement of Kim Bragg's conditional use request for drive-through facilities - **PLN-BOA-22-00050** — postponed (7-0): Postponement of Redwood Cooperative School's request to amend conditional use - **PLN-BOA-22-00048** — passed (7-0): Approval of variance for Travis Ison to reduce front yard setback - **PLN-BOA-22-00049** — passed (7-0): Approval of variance for Isaac Blanford to reduce front yard setback - **PLN-BOA-22-00033** — passed (7-0): Approval of conditional use permit for Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation - **PLN-BOA-22-00046** — passed (7-0): Approval of conditional use permit for Lauren Gilbert's home-based medical consulting business - **PLN-BOA-22-00045** — postponed (7-0): Continuation of Independence Bank's request for drive-through facilities --- ## Full transcript Beauty are gone one day, no matter what you dream or feel or say, it ends in dust and disarray. Like wind on the plains, sand through the glass, waves rolling in with the tide. Dreams die hard and we watch them erode, but we cannot be denied. The fire inside. Fire inside Fire inside Burning you up Burning you up Fire inside Thank you. Thank you. Look around you Look up here Take time to make time, make time to be there Look around And I'm mad My father was a gambler down in Georgia And he wound up on the wrong end of a gun And I was born in the backseat of a greyhound bus Rolling down Highway 41 Lord, I was born a rambling man Trying to make a living and do it the best I can When it's time for leaving, I hope you'll understand That I was born a rambling man I'm on my way to New Orleans this morning Leaving out of Nashville, Tennessee They're always having a good time down on the battle hall And don't tell women to think the world of me Lord, I was born a ramble man Trying to make a living and doing the best I can When it's time to believe in I hope you'll understand That I was born a man, man Lord, I was born a man, man Lord, I was born a man, man Lord, I was born a random name Lord, I was born a random name Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm officially calling our Board of Adjustments. October 10th, meeting to order. There's no minutes to approve, so first thing we will do is we'll swear the witnesses. Before I start, if I could just remind all our board members about the microphone. I'm real loud now. See, I think you guys turned it up. last meeting they had a hard time hearing and recording so just remember to turn your mic on and lean into it when necessary okay let's see here so first if anyone is wanting to speak today if i can get you guys to stand and i will swear all the witnesses at once say mr murphy i know you were speaking good deal raise your right hand Repeat after me. I promise to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. All righty. So sworn. And did everyone get an opportunity to sign in? All righty. So we will move on to sounding the agenda. And what I'll do at this point is I'll go through each case and see if the applicant is here. If there is no opposition or anyone to speak on that, those cases will be heard first. cases with representation that are represented for disapproval or where we have opposition, those will be heard second or after the first set of cases. So the first case I have is PLN BOA 22-48 Travis Ison. Is the applicant here? Okay. Is there anyone here to speak for or against this case? All right, Mr. Ison, you'll be first on the list. Our next variance appeal is PLN BOA 22-49. Isaac Blanford is the applicant present. Okay. Is there anyone here to speak for or against this application? Okay. You will be heard second. And I'm sorry, I also meant to open the floor here. do we have any applications that are looking to postpone or withdraw? If you could come to the podium please, state your name. Afternoon. My name is Steve Baker. I'm with Midwest Engineering and I'm the consultant on its plan 22-50 the Redwood Co-op School application. We would like to request a postponement one month please okay and the staff has spoken to you about that we're okay with this okay and is postponement the appropriate action okay all righty if anyone on the board has any questions or a motion i'll move is there just we want to make sure no one's here don't want to be heard in opposition okay is there anyone here to be heard on this particular case then i move for a one month postponement okay i'll second okay mr gross was first then mr needham a second all in favor oh i'm sorry i get to moving fast and i should have confirmed if there was any discussion anybody on the board All right, we'll take the vote. Looks like it's passed. We'll see you next month. Chair, staff also heard from the applicant representing 22-47 Kim Bragg. Staff was recommending postponement and the applicant stated they were comfortable with postponing for one month. Unfortunately, they have COVID right now, so they were not able to be here in person. So they have requested postponement to November. Okay. Could we get a motion to that effect? So moved. I'll second. Okay. We want to confirm no opposition? Yes. Thank you. That's why I keep branding. Is there anyone to speak or any opposition against that particular case? It's PLNBOA 22-47. okay so we had a first from mr gross a second from mr clark is that correct any further discussion all in favor i'm sorry do your vote the one time we did it manually now still say it every time all right that motion has passed let's get back to the remaining of the docket So we have conditional use appeal PLN BOA 22-33, Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation. Is the applicant present? And this one has been recommended for disapproval, so we will hear the entire case, and Mr. Murphy, you'll be first. Okay. Okay, and then we have PLNBOA 22-45 Independence Bank. Applicants present. And that one is recommended for disapproval as well, so you will be fully heard. And then we have PLNBOA 22-46, Lauren Gilbert, applicants present. Okay. Is there anyone here to speak for or against this particular item? Are you for or against? Against. Against, okay. So that one will be heard as well. I think that's it. Does it look like I got everybody? All righty. Let's move back to PLN BOA 22-48, Travis Eisen. The applicant can come to the podium. Thank you. Good evening. Good evening. Were you able to get signed in and you were also sworn? Yes, ma'am. Great. If you don't mind to state your name with spelling for staff there. It's Samuel, S-A-M-U-E-L, Ison, I-S-O-N. And it looks like the staff has recommended approval. Do we have any discussion or questions from the board? Were you guys able to take a look at the report? Yeah, very straightforward. If there's no questions, I'll entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to approve PLNBOA 22-48. Travis Eisen, request for a variance to reduce the required front yard setback from 300 to 150 feet in order to construct a single family home in an agricultural rural zone on property located at 5501 Haley Downs Drive, based on the staff's recommendation. Thank you, do I have a second? Ms. Plumley, second, thank you. Okay, any further discussion? If not, we'll take a vote. Okay. Thank you. Good luck with your project. Thank you. All righty. Our next case is PLNBOA 22-49. Mr. Isaac Blanford? Have you signed in and were you sworn in appropriately? Yes, ma'am. Good deal. If you could state again your name and spell it for staff, please. Isaac Blanford. It's I-S-A-A-C-B-L-A-N-F-O-R-D. Perfect. It looks like staff has recommended approval on this one as well. Anyone from the board have questions or concerns? Okay. If not, I'll entertain a motion. Ms. Plumlee. Thank you. Madam Chair, move approval of PLNBOA 2200049 Isaac Blanford for a variance to reduce the required front yard setback from 300 feet to 230 feet in order to construct a single family home in an agricultural rural zone on property located at 5867 Athens Walnut. Second. Okay. First from Ms. Plumlee and second from Mr. Clark. Any discussion? We'll take a vote. All in favor? Thank you. Thank you. Good luck with your project. Okay. So we're at PLNBOA 22-33. That's Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation. This one has been recommended for disapproval, so what we'll do in this case is allow the staff to present first, and then the applicant and the representation can follow. Hello. Megan Jennings with Planning Staff. Before you today, we have PLN BOA 22-33. It is a request for a conditional use permit for an 18-bed fraternity house within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a high-density apartment zone, R4 zone, on property located at 236 Lexington Avenue. This photo here, a little hard to see, but it's a general vicinity map. map. I'll point here for the audience and then to the board. Maxwell runs down here in this corner. High Street is here. Lexington runs this way. Is it the Christian church, Baptist church? There's a church here on the corner and the Phoenix parking garage here along with Vine Street and Town Branch Commons running here. So again for the board, Maxwell Street runs here. High Street is here. Lexington Avenue runs here. And then the Phoenix parking garage, the large church there on the corner, and then down here is Vine Street with the town branch commons. As you can see, this area is fairly dense with residential units. It is surrounded by multifamily dwelling structures, all within high-density residential zones. as well as a mix of downtown business and professional office zones. The subject property, zooming in here a little closer, is 7,500 square foot lot. Currently contains two different buildings. The main home here is 6,800 square feet. and there's a second building here attached by an elevated deck that's just around 900 square feet. This property is probably familiar to the board. They came before you guys in January of 2021 in order to have this structure approved as a four-unit multifamily structure. they needed several variances from the board in order to operate it as such. Let me go back sorry. The property was also approved in 1997 to serve as a fraternity house. At the time of approval the fraternity house was only providing a housing for eight residents. This current application is for an 18-bedroom fraternity. The 1997 conditional use for the frat was reviewed by the board in February of 1998, and again in February of 1999, just kind of annual reviews to make sure there weren't any issues, and there were no issues found. The fraternity house continued to operate there until just recently, Like I stated earlier in January of 2021, the board approved several variances. So this home could be converted into a four unit multifamily apartment building with a total of 14 bedrooms. How the structures were kind of divvied up. The main home here has three units in it and the home in the back corner had was its own kind of unit with two separate bedrooms. The previous boarding house type arrangement associated with the fraternity house was converted into the four separate units, each of which had their own bathroom and kitchen facilities. So that's how this structure is currently operating and how it's structured internally as well. The applicant today has submitted this site plan. And it's kind of small, so I've cropped and rotated it here so you can see the details. As you can see a little clearer now, the main house here with the east wing attached by this wide deck. And they currently are proposing seven parking spaces. There are five along this wall. And they were proposing two here, but traffic engineering had issues with the two spaces. and so they're only doing one parking space here on this wall and doing a seventh one here under the deck, which traffic did say was permissible. So this request is providing a total of 18 bedrooms, 16 bedrooms of which are in the main house, and two bedrooms are in the east wing, providing a total of 18 bedrooms and the seven parking spaces. In their letter of justification, the fraternity stated they are a national alcohol-free housing fraternity. They will have a housing manager who lives in the house with the fraternity members. They also stated that this house will be utilized to hold chapter meetings and university-approved events, such as Parents Weekend and other recruitment events. here I've listed the zoning ordinances stating that the fraternity house requires a conditional use and also I've included the parking calculation requirements doing the math here based on their bedrooms they're actually required to provide nine parking spaces but with the 2021 board approved case last January a part of one of those variances was to reduce the parking They are in the infill and so they are able to ask for a variance to reduce the parking up to 50%. Their 2021 case only required a total of 13 parking spaces and they were granted a variance to reduce that to seven. With their 18-bedroom fraternity, they're required nine parking spaces and the reduction to seven is a lesser reduction than the variance that was approved last year. and so staff determined that a parking variance was not needed for this particular application. I just wanted to be clear about that up front just because this does require nine, but they're only providing seven without actually asking for a parking variance. So if the board has any questions, I can definitely cover that again, but I wanted to address that up front. So staff is recommending disapproval of this request for the fraternity house. staff is concerned about the increase of intensity that would be associated with the fraternity house the proposed number of bedrooms with this fraternity house is an increase of what is currently approved as a multifamily residence and as a significant increase from the previously approved eight bedroom fraternity house that the structure used to serve as the increase in density associated with this request is not appropriate for the subject property as the neighborhood is already overburdened with a concentration of fraternities and is fairly intensely developed with other multifamily structures. Fraternities are also associated with nuisances just due to their concentration of residents, guests, and events. And during the 2021 Board of Adjustment hearing several members of the public voice concerns that the large deck on the plan here would essentially serve as a party deck. Staff is concerned that if this structure were to be utilized as a fraternity house the deck would have a strong likelihood of hosting many of the chapter events and would essentially function as the party deck is previously concerned by residents. So we are recommending disapproval and I'm happy to answer any questions the board may have at this time. Open it to the board. Yeah, let me ask this quick question to be clarified that in their letter to the staff, they say they have a house manager and house director. Is that correct? The staff only mentions the house manager, I think. Yes, if that's included in their justification. But they're both living with, I mean, that's, am I understanding that correctly? I can let the applicant answer that. Yeah, that's fine. Just so we can clarify that. Yeah. I just wanted to clarify. So we approved in January of 21 to allow this as a four-unit multifamily apartment building with 14 bedrooms. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. And then that changed hands? So the Phi Kappa Tau fraternity had that up to that point? And then they vacated? And then now we approve this for the four-unit multifamily apartment building in 21. and then nothing's changed who's been occupying it from then i believe it currently functions as the multi-family structure that it was approved for in 2021. okay and that current structure as it sits right now has 14 bedrooms total yes between the two different buildings okay and they are asking for four more How do they get four more? Do they have to remodel? I can let the applicant address that. I haven't seen floor plans. I do have a question regarding that. So is staff saying we would be comfortable with 14 bedrooms as opposed to 18? Well, they're approved for the 14 bedrooms. They can continue to operate with 14 bedrooms, but in order to increase to 18 bedrooms, this variance is required. It's more of the change in use from the multifamily dwelling for individual units versus one home being utilized by a fraternity. But we still count the number of bedrooms? Yes, just reporting that. Okay. Thank you. Is there another question? Other questions of staff? Okay. Thank you, Megan. The applicant would come to the podium. Madam Chair, I'm Dick Murphy, and I'm pleased today to be representing the Epsilon chapter of the Phi Delta Theta Fraternity. My attention was taken away. we had a minor technical difficulty as i detected after i came here and that on my handout my copy machine had copied had cut off the bottom half inch of every page so if you saw i enlisted my clients to help me as we were sitting here to write page numbers on the lower right hand corner of each page that we're doing that so we have been occupied while we were sitting here waiting for our case to come up and we thank you for your patience so as i said i'm this the epsilon chapter of phi delta theta fraternity here at the university of kentucky with me today is kyle heffernan who is the chapter president and he by the way is also the former just finished a term as president of the university of kentucky interfraternity council baxter brown here is the chapter secretary and craig harden is here with the owner of the property and i think hunter porter our alumni president is here in the back back of the room as well uh giving you a little background to this the this property was before you as as miss jennings mentioned to you in january of 2021 because of the need to remodel the building the i've got a front front on picture of the building there as it looks today we were here before you 18 or 19 months ago because the building looked quite different at that point Mr. Hardin had just purchased the building when we came before you in January 2021. He spent the time since then remodeling it and just had people move in for this semester two months ago. It was the first time people were able to live there. Because those of you who were on the board at that time, it was a Zoom meeting, you may recall. But this had been used as a fraternity house for 24 years. and the fraternity that was there vacated. The property was sold. Mr. Hardin bought it, but it was in an extremely poor state of repair, not because of the fraternity, but because of the construction method that was used on the property. They used, when this was built back in the 1980s, it was built by Dick Doyle, who I knew who was a zoning attorney here in Lexington. He actually got Fayette Mall approved And he built this house for his family. You can see the wall, which you have the driveway coming in. The rest of the property is surrounded by this wall. You're looking at the shortest two sections of the wall right here and here. They're about three or four feet tall. The rest of it in the front is six feet tall. That's a solid concrete block wall. and then at the at the back you'll see in later pictures it steps up another two feet to be an eight-foot wall around the entire property because he built it sort of as a take on a French chateau and if you had seen it before it was reconstructed if you looked at it from the street it looked like it was built of five foot by three foot blocks of gray stone and it had a just a gravel area in the front no landscaping just a graveled area sort of like some of these French chateaus you see I guess I haven't seen many French chateaus but the and but it wasn't made out of blocks it was made out of ephus which is stands for exterior insulation and finish system sometimes called synthetic stucco and it was built in the 80s about the year that ephus came out as a product and we mentioned at that hearing that there was a big class action suit from people all over the country because the apparently the instructions for installing ephus that was sent out by the manufacturer were totally wrong and buildings all over the country suffered water infiltration and this one was a particularly bad example because i went in and saw the examples that mr harden showed me after he purchased it water was inside everywhere inside the walls the structural wood beams were rotted out and And as I said, he spent the last two years fixing this up. We had to get a variance from you because the third floor of the property, it had a mansard roof. It had a slanted roof going up, then it was flat, then it went over and back down on the third floor. And because of that, because we were straightening out this wall, which is on a zero lot line, Mr. Doyle knew his zoning. So back then a zero lot line was approved. So this wall and one of the walls of the east wing in the rear are built on the property line with no windows. But anyway, since we had a slanted roof and we're going to a straight wall, we had to get a variance for the third floor in order to put the third floor wall also on the zero lot line, which was where the two floors were already built. So we went before you in 2021 to get that variance. The, give you a little more history. Mr. Doyle passed away and his widow used it as a bed and breakfast for a few years. And then Phi Kappa Tau fraternity, not Phi Theta Delta, but Phi Kappa Tau fraternity, used it for 24 years as a fraternity house until they moved out and got in bad repair. and Mr. Hardin has spent a lot of time and a lot of money repairing it. Where we are today is that you all unanimously approved our variance request back in January of 2021 for the variance so we could do this. And the issue about the deck, the same issue came up at that point, and we showed you what we were doing, and you all recommended approval of us unanimously, and I'll show you that in a minute. I want to first tell you about Phi Delta Theta fraternity. It's an international fraternity, and we have put in, at page one, numbered in ink at the bottom right corner, the letter from the international headquarters of Phi Delta Theta Fraternity. I've just highlighted a little bit in there. I'm not going to read it to you, but they are the international headquarters of the fraternity. It's very proud of the fact that in 1997, they were the first national fraternity to come out and advocate for an alcohol-free policy at every one of their chapters. uh and they say in that letter they took some grief from it from other fratern national fraternities but it has turned out to be the right thing to do and it says since the implementation of alka free alcohol free housing phi delta theta has undergone transformational change and has become a noticed leader within the fraternal world and they said that they fully back what the local chapter is proposing for this property the on pages two through five of our handout i just have listed some some of the chapter accolades they're proud of what they do at the fraternity one thing that i think is not listed in there is they won the most recent who were the most recent recipients of the deans uk dean's cup for 2021 through 2022 and that cup signifies the best overall fraternity campus excuse me chapter on the uk campus based on philanthropy service involvement and responsible conduct it's a very diverse chapter it has supported many activities at uk you can see them there the one thing i noted there the leading fraternity fundraiser for dance blue in 2020 2021 and 2022 and they do cleanup projects at raven run mcconnell springs jacobson park and the uk campus itself and they've got many many more if you want to look over those three pages getting back to the property itself we wanted to clarify for you the issue about the bedrooms because when the the board of adjustment site plan was submitted to you it stated that they have 18 bedrooms that is not the case we have five units 14 bedrooms there are 18 people living there there are 18 beds but there's 14 bedrooms on there so we're not changing the number of bedrooms and we apologize for that mistake mr hart and i were not involved when this was first filed we would have clarified that earlier if we could have but there will have five units and 14 bedrooms now you may say well as miss jennings told you when we were before you in 2021 we had four units and 14 bedrooms where did the fifth unit come from and that came from the unit in the rear the east what's labeled as is the east wing in the rear that is a two-story addition that was originally planned to be one unit but when we get after you all approved it and went to building inspection building inspection wanted an accessible unit on the property and as you can see from this picture the main building is about five feet higher than grade it has steps going up to the first floor so that was not an accessible unit so they did an accessible unit in the rear you can enter on grade so the the ground floor of the rear unit is totally accessible but in adapting that and making the hallways wider and and kitchens wider and that sort of thing they lost the room for the stairway up to the second floor so the second floor is now technically a second unit because it is not connected with the first floor because the second couldn't be could not be made accessible so we have same number of bedrooms 14. now we have five bedrooms instead of four bedrooms on here five units excuse me i'm i'm getting it mixed up too we have five units instead of four units same number of bedrooms on there what will be the change if we if we if you approve us today how will this change we will still have the same number of people living here we will mr harden has has is an experienced landlord in the student area and i've worked with him for many years he He has emphasized responsible residential living. And to emphasize that point, not only in this building, but in those other buildings, he requires leases to be signed by the residents. He requires also the leases to be signed by the parents of every resident. And not only that, the parents are jointly and severally liable for whatever the student may be liable for. So the practical way that works out is, for instance, if a Herbie is left out on the street the day after it is supposed to be picked up, Mr. Hardin has to act like Scrooge and he fines the residents $100. If it happens again, it goes up to, I think, $200 the second time. But it doesn't go up. the second time doesn't usually happen because when there's a fine under the lease the parents get notified as well about the fine as well as the student resident and usually the parental pressure is so immense that there is never another violation of the lease lease provisions so the parents are involved he has rules about what can and cannot happen at the property interesting thing here too is he is a landlord can't really limit alcohol use as long as the resident is over the legal age to drink now the the members of the fraternity who are currently living here not as a fraternity but as leasing members, I think are voluntarily agreeing to the non-alcohol policies. But if you approve this as a fraternity, obviously it comes under the national no-alcohol policy as we showed you with the letter from the international headquarters of the fraternity. But it also comes under UK's control because if this is a registered fraternity with the university which it is now right now their meetings are held on uk property because they don't have space to they don't have a place to meet otherwise they they reserve rooms at the university student center or other locations for their meetings but since they're a registered fraternity even though they're located on private property they have to comply with uk's very strict no alcohol policy as well so the interesting thing to me about this is if you approve this This automatically becomes a no alcohol premises. And that doesn't mean just at the social functions. It means all the time no alcohol is allowed on this property. So we will not be increasing in density. We will be under the very strict no alcohol policy of UK as well as on the international chapter of Phi Delta Theta. I wanted to talk to you about the, well, I wanted to mention Mr. Hardin's management as well. I know we had a couple letters of objection that came in, and it appeared that one person was extremely upset about another fraternity located in the area. I want to emphasize that the pictures you were presented in the letters of objection are not of this fraternity. They're of another fraternity. And I know if I brought in a daycare facility before you, for example, you wouldn't judge one daycare facility based on the record of a competing daycare facility several blocks away. And that's what we're asking for you. We're asking you to judge us on our own merits, not on what may have happened somewhere else for another fraternity. Mr. Hardin owns the property at the corner of Maxwell Street and Martin Luther King. If you drive by there, it's the three-story building which has sort of some, I call it like curly-Q concrete in front and there's an exterior walkway. That building was in a bad state of repair also when he purchased it I think in 2015 an absolute auction he spent a lot of time fixing that up there is a fraternity in there as well and he has governed that with his management policy as far as we know there have been no complaints about what has gone on in that fraternity on property that mr hardin has owned for the last seven years the um and i want to point out too there's been a lot of publicity about what goes on on state street after after ball games and i think you know on state street i'm not sure there are any fraternities on state street the problem on state street is absentee ownership and lack of management they have a lot of uh properties that are owned by some of them i call mom and pop owners some of them are big corporate owners but they don't have somebody there looking at that property every day mr harden or his one of his managers looks at this property and every property every day to make sure there's not trash violations and that sort of thing going on the property and this one will particularly be looked at because mr hardin's office is right across the street even if he didn't want to look at it every day he's going to be looking at every day and he will be noting what's going on on this property i want to address the issue about the deck for a minute. I've got a couple pictures of that I wanted to show you. There you go. There is the deck. This was approved by you all back 19 months ago in January of 2021. We are standing on the property next door down the street toward UK. I'm looking back at this property. Now, this property is also owned by Mr. Hart, and I want to point it out. He owns the property on either side of this property. It's one reason he bought it when it came up for sale, because he owns the property on both sides. This is the wall, which you can see jumps from here and gets even higher here. This is a wall without windows, which you all required under your ruling 19 months ago, which we didn't have any problem with. This is the deck right here that we're talking about. I want to point out that the deck is located here. this is the stairway up to the second and third floor that is the second means of ingress and egress under the fire code the first is internal second is external this has met all fire codes and has been respected by the fire department this is the deck located here this is the the an entrance to the second floor in the east wing is located right here and this this half is a stairway the drawing didn't totally indicate that half of this first floor deck is consisting of the stairway and the other half which i think is about eight or nine feet wide is all that's left as can be for a deck but what we pointed out in january last year that you approved is that this deck is not up and adjoining the property to the rear. The deck is internal to our project here and is buffered from the property behind us by the east wing here on this. So if anything goes on on that deck, and there's not that much space for it, it is located between the Bain building and the east wing on this property. If you go to the next picture, that's just a closer view of the deck. You can see in there through the bottom the wall on the other side which walls that off from the other side of the property. Here is the courtyard just the other side. You can see it's got a, I think that's an 8 foot concrete block wall that Mr. Doyle built in the 80s and there's a wall going this way along the rear as well so that totally gives total privacy and sound protection from properties on the other side. So the deck faces inward, and the east wing also has a wall facing the rear, which has no windows or doors or openings as well. So on two sides of that east wing and the rear, two sides have no windows or doors. because they are on lot lines. The other two do, but they are faced inward on it. And the deck is quite a bit smaller than what you'd think on first glance to it. And as I said, there's no change in density, number of people living here. If you go on to the next picture here, That's the, we are looking here at the, again, from the property toward UK, showing that eight-foot transitioning down to a six-foot wall. That's the wall that was built by Mr. Doyle when he owned it. If you could go to the next picture. I wanted to talk about the only change that will happen if you approve this is that, well, two changes. one it'll mandatorily be alcohol free but second it will allow for chapter meetings to be held here it will allow them to have alumni over their parents and that sort of thing at this property now if we do that the meetings will be held there is a mr doyle built a large sunken living room on the first floor of the property which is very large can can accommodate a number of people and And that's where the previous fraternity had all its meetings, in the sunken living room on the first floor. So they can have meetings there. They will be able to have alumni there, parents there, but no alcohol. The question is then, well, where will those folks park? And we have the picture. This is the UK E lot, which is just catty corner. It's the old L.R. Cook property. you've been around a long time like i have which was demolished many years ago but it has over a hundred parking spaces in it it's at the corner of high street and lexington avenue across the next street from calvary baptist church and it is a permit controlled parking lot of uk if you could go to the next slide what we have i've taken a close-up of the of the slide of the sign here as you can see a permit is required certain hours and no permit is required anybody can park there even i can park there after hours monday through thursday from 7 30 p.m on anybody can park in that lot without a permit friday after 3 30 p.m anybody can park there and saturday and sunday anybody can park there all day so they are will structure their meetings so that they will occur when no permit is required in this parking lot so we're not going to have a problem with off on street parking or people trying to park in other apartment apartment parking lots they can park here i've been there i'll check there because this was taken during uk hours but i've checked there a number of times after hours when those permits are no longer required and it's usually 80 90 percent vacant at that point i don't know why more other people don't park there during the time but it's usually vacant at the time so that will be available for people who are coming to meetings at this property i want to emphasize too that even if that weren't available right across the street from this is the city's transit center parking garage and the bus transit center if somebody's going to take the bus they estimate that a third of their at least a third of their members are going to walk to meetings after all the reason we're here is because we're within walking distance from uk so many of the members will walk to meetings as well on that or ride a bicycle to the meetings on that so we feel very strongly that the Anybody coming to a meeting at the house here would have a place to park. And, of course, as I said, there will be no alcohol served at the meetings at the house. I wanted to go back to my handout. On page six, numbered to the right-hand bottom, I had what the definition of a fraternity or sorority house is out of our ordinance. And it defines it as a building for multiple people to live in. But there's three factors that make it a fraternity, none of which is going on now, and some of which will happen if you approve this. One is they could put a sign, an identification sign with their emblem on it, on the building, identifying it as a fraternity. Second, they can have fraternity-sponsored social activities there. and third they can have events to which fraternity or fraternity alumni or prospective members are invited and I might add there's a fourth one practically speaking they can serve no alcohol on there because they're a UK recognized fraternity we have a couple other letters in the in the record here one is from mr. Hardin on page seven from his company explaining the process he took to go over this and he mentions that he's run the fraternity which is located at maxwell and martin luther king this way since 2015 without issue on page nine i have a letter from eden companies they own property directly behind us which front on haggerman court I might add that it appears to me from the PVA records that every property on Hagerman Court is owned by one of three companies. One is Eden Companies, which owns four of the lots. Another is a company from California, which owns a greater number of lots. And there's a third one. I don't know what the origin of their company is. But Mr. Humphress, the owner of Eden Companies, is in support of this. He said he feels the renovation has gone exactly as planned and represented last year. He said he notes that the entire property is surrounded by a large concrete wall. He says the building at 236 Lexington Avenue, our property, is occupied, but we can barely tell. We are aware of no noise, parking, or other complaints. And he also says parking should not be an issue. He knows that Mr. Harden owns the property on either side. He notes them, and he notes the UK parking lot. Next thing I have in my handout from page 10 to 15 is the minutes from January last year. And I'll just note I've highlighted at the end, and I'm sorry, I've cut off two lines, where you all unanimously approved the remodel so it could be the way it is today and by the way we'll have no exterior change whatsoever to the building but in your finding you know about the deck it said it is constructed of concrete excuse me the wall is constructed of concrete blocks and has no windows or doors facing either the property on the right or the rear by having the doors and windows facing the existing larger structure for the deck noise light and other activities should be directed inward to the subject property rather than outward this your lines got cut off at the bottom but it says be directed inward rather than outward in addition it will allow an accessible dwelling unit to be constructed in the existing rear building that's exactly what happened as mr humphress pointed out the activity is directed inward he said he could very barely tell that the building is occupied from his vantage point behind on haggerman court and you found the variances granted were very reasonable and um the just want to make sure i haven't left out anything i have have gone away from my outline but just i want to mention that we are r4 we're in the high density apartment zone we have an r5 a high rise apartment zone just one door away from us toward uk there's an r5 so one door toward downtown from us is the post office on there which is located in the downtown b2a zone we're lower density than we we measured mr hardin's property next to the next to the post office which is also owned by the properties owned by mr Harden we're lower density than that property is but your action today will not affect density one way or the other we won't be able to have one more person living in this property than we do today if you approve this and we're sorry for the mix-up about the number of bedrooms but there are 14 bedrooms there still will be 14 bedrooms. And this was used as a fraternity for 24 years with fraternity meetings for the previous fraternity that was here for a quarter century. We've tried to, we wanted to demonstrate to you that there'll be no change in density. The deck is where you approved it a year and a half ago. Parking will not be an issue here. and this chapter this chapter does not only tolerate the no alcohol policy this chapter embraces the no alcohol policy as their national association has in the past and mr harden here is a very very active and very hands-on manager for the property at the end of my handout i've i've passed out a set of findings if you decide to approve this you do have to adopt findings if you wanted to adopt them as I've written them, that's fine. If you want to change them, that's fine, too. But I know your attorney always tells me to bring findings to you, so I have brought my findings to you on this one. I think that's all we had to present to you. We'd like to be able to answer any questions or see if there's any other objectors here. We thank you for listening to us. I think you can see Phi Delta Theta is an organization which is striving to be the best fraternity at the UK, and it succeeded if you take the Dean's Cup award that they received last year. They're responsible. As I said, they embrace the no-alcohol policy, and we thank you very much for your listening to us. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Of course, just stay there for just a moment. Does the board have any questions of the applicant at this point? I do have a quick one again just for clarification. If the number of beds are staying the same, then what's the reason for the requirement for the variance request? Just the title of what's going on? Well, we're not asking for a variance. We're asking for a conditional use. And that is because we're asking it to be a fraternity. We're asking for permission to put the sign on the front of the building, and along with that will come the ability to have their meetings at this location rather than having to sign up for a room someplace on campus to have the meetings and let the alumni come here and have meetings. The alumni have been involved in doing this. I think they sort of have an interest in being able to attend meetings here as well. And in its current layout of the five units, how are they being leased now? Are they like other student proper, you know, are there multiple students per unit? is that what we're finding is customary there are multiple students per unit he has an individual lease with each one signed by the parents that will that will remain it'll still be leased that way the fraternity will use the sunken living room on the first floor for the meetings that will be the location of the fraternity meetings and is it currently used just as a common area for the residents that are there yes okay i think mr clark did you I'll ask a question later. Just some clarification about parking, but they can come later once we hear all the testimony. Okay, thank you, Mr. Murphy. At this time, should I open the floor, or would staff like to speak again? We can let the public speak, and then staff can rebut anything that's brought up. Okay. So the floor is open for public comment at this time. Do we have anyone wanting to speak? Okay. Please come forward. Will you state your name and spell it for the record, please? Hi, my name is Blake Standifer, S-T-A-N-D-A-F-E-R. Okay, and Mr. Stanford, did you sign in and were you sworn early? I was sworn and I did sign in. Okay, great. Please proceed. So I am a honors political science student at UK. I've been on the Dean's List. I have years of experience working, volunteering, nonprofit work, community work here in Kentucky as well. I also lived on the corner of Lexington and East Maxwell, so I wanted to bring my testimonial for what it's like living at that intersection. I almost universally fraternity houses have tons of trash around them. They can be very loud. The trash can include broken glass and other dangerous items. Parking is extremely crowded. And I don't believe that the area needs another fraternity house, especially with the shooting that happened recently, reports of deaths from hazing nationwide. Especially on that street, there were a lot of issues with trash and vehicles blocking the road and just being a general blight for the area. And just to have a quick comment in response to the gentleman before me, I think the no alcohol policy is a joke. And anyone who's been associated with fraternity activities knows that's a complete joke. Also, the number of residents, I've heard a lot of friends who were in fraternities and who have gone to fraternity events. they know that there will be more people living there. There's always the stereotypical dude on the couch. To conclude, I really just think of, I have the image of a working woman getting off the bus and getting home, trying to get her baby to bed, and then being kept up by loud parties, being bothered by a bunch of irresponsible young men, which I would know I was an irresponsible young man. I honestly think that every frat house on this road in this area has been an oozing sore on the neighborhood, and I don't believe this one would be any different. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you. I have not sworn in. Okay. Do you swear to tell the truth and hold truth today? I swear to tell the truth. I would wish for the time to tell the whole truth, but nothing but the truth. Well, we don't have that type of time, but definitely. Were you able to sign in as well? I did sign in, yes, and I'm Amy Clark, and I live at 628 Castle Road in the 3rd District. And I always study over which way to go with this. Yes. Do you think we can dim the other lights so that these can be more visible? Okay. I share the gentleman who just spoke's concerns that it won't be as optimal as represented in the intents and hopes of the applicant. I urge that you disapprove this fraternity petition. And especially I would like you to carefully review the site plan. There are some details that need better scrutiny, I believe. Yes, it's been a fraternity for a good many years, and the front area, the front courtyard, courtyard has been crammed with parking even to the point of spilling into the sidewalk into the area. And usually that's when classes are meeting because everybody and his brother parks in there. And I observed it myself many years ago and I heard just very recently from a near neighbor that yes, it's still that way, crowded front courtyard parking rather than following the lines. Most of the street has grown to an occupancy at and beyond its planned design and uses. Events and gatherings cannot but disturb surrounding neighbors. I'm thinking especially of the apartment building adjacent. As you're facing it, it would be on the left. And it does have working people in it, as the gentleman imagined. I was concerned there was no indoor common space. It appears that there is. I would ask what the fire occupancy is for that, the fire rating, and does that actually correspond to the size needed for fraternity meetings. It's in R4. It has two residential buildings. I'm wondering why there isn't a development plan under the provisions of Article 9. It's not one building, it's sometimes called an east wing, but it's made clear that there's really just a deck between them. And on your letter here in the bottom corner, I've quoted that buildings connected by breezeways or similar shall be considered to be detached buildings. So I'm wondering why it doesn't have a proper development plan. And if it did, there would be scrutiny of many important matters, I think, that need to be addressed on this intensity of development. I want to show you the access easement, which is depicted on the site plan, the BOA site plan, between, and this is a photograph from this February, okay, February 2022, you can see that there's access between the buildings under separate corporations but the same owner as the applicant noted. So you can get into the rear area from the adjacent lot, 250 Lexington Avenue. So it connects there, and when I was there not long ago, a couple weeks ago, I observed parking in that rear area. So it would be an opportunity to add parking, but not necessarily parking that's planned and delineated on the plan. I don't believe there is adequate space for that access easement. I'm perfectly well aware that private parties can make access easements between adjoining properties. We have nothing to say about that. But it appears to me that that access easement there impinges further on the green space provided and required on the development plan for this adjoining property, 250 Lexington Avenue. So this is a picture from 2015, and it looks to me that there, the landscaping in the rear, you can see how it curves about and has trees, is generous up to the requirement of the zoning ordinance for that property at that time. I can show you that's a plan approved in 1999. and you can see that that whole area as you're looking at it on your your left would be the adjoining fraternity property you can see that that whole area is designated for green space and there are plantings in it in the front I don't know how clearly you can see it but there's a sort of detention base and it's an open trough and you see the parking delineated what happened was the building was reconceived to be not two-bedroom apartments but to use the interior spaces of each apartment for three apartments and that happened about 2015 or 16 so you can see that from 2015 when it was for two-bedroom apartments to 2016 you can actually see a little bulldozer grubbing out the trees and landscaping preparatory to enlarging the parking there. And as far as I know, and I did check best I could, there was never an amended development plan for this adjoining property, 250 Lexington Avenue, to accommodate additional parking or to allow the removal of the trees and the landscaping. Nonetheless, you can see that by 2022, all that landscaping is gone. You can even, if you squint, see two vehicles parked in the area that is really quite near and possibly within the area that was a detention basin. So what's happened is in allowing the easement, it would implicitly allow access to the adjoining lot, removal of landscaping, removal of tree canopy, and a de facto access for parking in the rear yard, which is not large. So I would say in general it looks like two buildings, not one, and I think it should have all the scrutiny that two buildings on a lot in R4 deserve, two residential buildings. It seems to, in the access to the rear, it seems also to be impinging on the stormwater management, the landscaping, and the tree canopy required for the adjacent property. I wonder whether how large the gathering space for the fraternity is since it's divided now on the subject property into five apartments. It's worth asking what's the fire occupancy of that room, what are its dimensions, and how large will their gatherings be. I would add to the building at Maxwell and Martin Luther King was mentioned, the one with the honeycomb treatment that Mr. Harden also owns and manages. It generally, when I drive by, is in violation of its plan, parking as delineated on its site plan with the BOA. And although the E lot is available across the street for across the street for the subject property. That's after hours. We seem to be seeing a daily problem during times that class is in session. Just checking, I think that's it. So if your consideration is are the public facilities adequate for this use? I think certainly there's a problem with parking. And if it's not provided privately on site, there's plainly nowhere else to put it. I do think it would be a nuisance to the very nearest neighbors, and some of them do work, and they're just regular folks. So I urge that you deny this use and consider since the owner's behavior and general conduct and management of such properties was brought into testimony. I would add that his management of the property next door, the multifamily building next door, and also the one on the MLK Maxwell Street corner, in my experience, is not all that it was represented to be. Thank you very much for your attention and your care in this. I do think it's one too many, more than one too many fraternities. Thank you. Thank you. Would the staff like an opportunity to rebut? We did want to thank the applicant for clarifying the unit in the bedroom discrepancy earlier. the five units in that rear structure I guess especially with the housing manager probably wanting their own space I wanted to address before the board two or three different things first staff is still concerned even though it may be the same number of bedrooms the intensity of the use increase from a multifamily structure to a fraternity house especially considering the events that would be hosted in the home not just for their current members but other members living out of the structure as well as other guests and alumni as they stated in their presentation I also wanted to talk about the deck the very first photo that the applicant showed and I'll see if we can put it up on screen I just guessed the first one, sorry. Can you go back to that very first one? Okay. The board can see it a little clearer than the audience, so I apologize. But the parking here, even on site, is depicted. This is illegal angle parking. It's not as it's actually striped on their site plan. and so that'll be a problem I'm sure with traffic engineering and we have not received any complaints about the parking on this property but I just noted that when the applicant showed it earlier and then back to the party deck staff is still concerned about it being utilized by the fraternity house in comparison to the multifamily structure that it as it exists now essentially the deck for the multifamily structure operates as a shared common space between the four units when a fraternity house were to move in here it would act as private space for the fraternity house it's a little bit different of a functionality as the deck and so staff has can still has concerns about how that deck could be utilized by the fraternity members and especially in association with their events regarding ms clark's comments about it the two building situation in 2021 when this the variances were approved and the deck was reviewed by the board the division of building inspection stated that or i guess clarified that as the deck was proposed it was large enough and also elevated that it actually acted as a connection between the two buildings and essentially they functioned as one so i was kind of building inspections interpretation of why that deck was allowed to be built that way in the site function as one kind of building rather than requiring a development plan so I just wanted to kind of address those things and then the parking that I pointed out earlier does the board have any questions for staff after hearing all the testimony today okay thank you that's all we have to say Would the applicant like to speak again? I just wanted to say a couple of comments in response. I was talking to Kyle Baxter and Mr. Hardin during some of those comments that were made by others. As we mentioned, the deck is functioning as you all approved it. It's not large enough to have a large fraternity gathering on there. It's nine feet wide at its widest. It functions mainly as an access point, stairways up to the back, and an access point. We feel, though, that if there are people out on the deck, whether they're fraternity members or residents, that it is well insulated from other uses, especially much better than it would be if this deck were up against the property line. It's not up against the property line. It's up against the back portion of the building, which has a two-story wall with no windows or openings in it behind it. I'm concerned about, we tend to treat fraternities with a broad brush. All fraternities this or all fraternities that. Of course, this did function as a fraternity for 25 years. It had chapter meetings there, large meetings. It had chapter meetings. There have been no shootings at fraternities lately. I think the shooting referred to, as I recall in news reports, was at a private house. It was not necessarily associated with fraternities. It was at a private house. There have been shootings downtown. That doesn't mean that downtown, all downtown businesses are the same and should be condemned. As I said, if we had a daycare here, I know you would treat the daycare on its own merits, and we're asking to treat this fraternity on its own merits, which I think are very high merits. As I said, they are engaging in a voluntary no-alcohol policy for the members who live there at the present time. there are no student conduct offenses against this fraternity at this time I just checked with Kyle on that as we were talking there is no hazing at this fraternity somebody mentioned shouldn't approve them because there's going to be hazing there's no hazing at this fraternity I think as you could see from the chapter letter or the letter we put in from the international headquarters they are very concerned about the treatment of their members and the safety their members especially through their no alcohol policy i know mr harden checks his property for trash and and it's actually to his financial benefit to find trash on on the properties he manages because he finds them and charges them money he doesn't do it to make money but he does it to make sure the people living there get the message that they're not supposed to do this and the message goes through especially when the message comes from not only him but the parents of the people living there wanted to mention the opening in the wall in the back the one the opening i showed you in that photograph that opens to the property next door mr hartons when we came in to you in january last year we showed that on the property as an access easement into this on our site plan and you approved our application i think it's very important to have that opening there because as you recall this property is totally walled in on four sides except for the driveway in and there's a little passage right next to the driveway for a pedestrian to walk in that's all there is i think for fire safety reasons if none other they need to have that opening in the back if you get out evacuate toward the back you need a place to walk off the premises rather than having to walk around the building and get back to the street so i think that's important i think if there's an issue about the way mr harden is parking cars if they're not following the lines that can be discussed with the building inspection or whoever enforces that issue we can discuss that if you wish but that's not really relevant to this getting getting back to it i think we demonstrated to you something unique about this particular fraternity. I think there's something unique about the management of this property. We're building it physically exactly the way you all approved it a year and a half ago. And we're certainly asking you to go ahead and approve this. And if there's any other questions or anything like that, we'd be happy to answer them for you. Thank you. Does the board have any further questions? Let me follow up now, if I might. It concerns me that, well, just let me say I'm just kind of on the fence here, because in the first place, I think it's dangerous to incite fraternities simply because of incidences that we know have happened. bothers me that well this is all fraternities are terrible they don't know how to act and they so I think that's that's a mistake I think we shouldn't do that on the other hand this there there are some problems that you know we have to recognize let's start with parking we say there are 14 bedrooms but they're still going to be 18 people living there there's there 18 beds. That's correct, is it not? So we know we have 18 people there. It's hard for me to believe that only seven people in a fraternity are going to have a car to park. So maybe you all could clarify that for me. But that seems a bit unreasonable. So if I'm mistaken, I would be happy to be corrected. it. So, like I say, I'm kind of on the fence, but I don't want to indict this particular fraternity simply because there are bad actors for whatever reason. And so, I would love to hear what the rest of the board feels about this, because I certainly am on the fence. Ms. Clark, I would say I think the seven parking spaces we approved last time as the variance were the same number of beds. So I think that fell into the infill and redevelopment where they were. I'm sorry. Megan and I talked once already. Yeah, but because that was already done previously, they actually did not have to come before us again. and asked to reduce the parking. But if I can interject. Yes, please. Before they weren't having necessarily organized events such as alumni reunions and other things that they have proposed. So it's a little bit different, but now it's a destination venue for others to come in and not just for the residents. And I think that's the point that the staff was trying to make. and what their presentation is, even though it's the same number of bedrooms, the number of parking is the intensity of who will be now coming to this building is a question. And as to the access easement, I don't know if it's a recorded access easement, if it's written, but that's a development plan, planning commission. I mean, we can have the hole there on our site plan, but that doesn't mean that they can drive through it. That's a planning commission item, so I don't think that's really something that we need to address us. If Ms. Clark has an issue, she can always file up a complaint with the city and they'll investigate. gate, but that's just my feeling is I was kind of interested in what the staff's position given the testimony today, but it sounds like they've not changed their mind, and at this point, I'm more likely than not to support the staff. Yeah, at this point, I'm willing to support the staff's recommendation. Okay. do we have anything further yes please we understand that parking is an issue i've been conferring with kyle the chapter president here while you were all talking the uh they have not had a problem i i asked him if does he have complaints because somebody living here is some is somebody living here complaining about not being able to park here he said no he said as far as he knows the number of parking spaces is sufficient he does know that two members who who live here have made other off-campus parking arrangements or off off-site parking arrangements they can rent spaces on a monthly basis at another location so two of them have done that and he said many of the members do not have cars so the parking issue has not been a problem i asked him also if he would be agreeable to a condition that all meetings and events that are held at the premises for the alumni and and others parents and that sort of thing and chapter meetings of the members at this site if he'd agree to a condition that all those would be held only at times when the adjacent uk lot allows parking without a permit in other words after 7 30 p.m those four days after 3 30 on friday and or saturday and sunday when it's available all day he said yes that would be okay to assure you that we're not introducing a flood of parking into the neighborhood at times when the neighborhood can't handle it it certainly can handle it at times when the uk lot goes past the time when a permit is required there's always spaces available to that lot at that time so we'd be happy to have that condition on the conditional use permit but mr murray how does that help if uk decides to build a building on that lot or further prohibit you from parking is that my issue is the parking i mean if you had a church across the street that said you guys can have 10 rental spaces here's our agreement we've got a guaranteed number of space but we're you got a lot of third party hopes and dreams of to keep the status quo going that aren't necessarily something we should necessarily rely upon to solve your parking issue on your client's lot? Well, let me give you two answers to that. One is the Transit Center garage, which is right across High Street from the UK lot, which if you drive by there on those hours, always have spaces available on the surface that is on the same level as High Street. Another thing, though, is even if a building is built on the U.K. lot and a building is built on the transit center lot, we'd have to come back to you. We'd have to come back to you and say, if you put that condition on us, we need you to take that condition off. And you'd have to have a hearing on it, and then you all could decide if you want to change it. It's just like anybody else who comes in and has an amendment to one of the conditions that are imposed when you get a conditional use permit. If items change, they've got to come back to you and ask you to have another hearing and either extend it or change a condition or something like that. So if there's a change like that, we'd have to come back before you or else the fraternity couldn't stay there. I agree. I'm sorry. No, I was just going to make a statement, I suppose, regarding us developing some consistency on how we're defining these things. This is my concern. I could be on the fence like Mr. Clark. I could go either way. But if we are looking at what we intend to direct in the infill and redevelopment area, parking should not be our main concern. We're supposed to have some lenience or some favoritism towards walkability. And so then I think we find it difficult to do both, to say, hey, let's be right downtown in an area that's close to school, and you can walk to get everywhere, but make sure you also have enough parking spaces. And I think that's what the regulation allows for us to do now. That's why they're able to get a variance, because they are in that infill and redevelopment area. And so the parking in itself should not be the major concern, but there are solutions, even if it is a concern. We'd have a different issue if we were outside of the infill and redevelopment area. But being right there and smack between downtown and campus, the implication or the encouragement by us in our development plan in the city is actually to create spaces that are walkable and walkable for the students would apply to both. So I think I feel torn on how can I require them to have this parking and then also say we really want to encourage to be in these spaces that are walkable and livable and all the kids. You all have to get a bike and go back and forth to class. You know, that type of thing we see in our head we want to encourage, but then we're putting some restrictions that would make that more or would not encourage that as much. Can I address that? State your name. I'm Craig Hardin, and I'm the owner of the property. And I just thought that I could maybe address that. But when we came before the Board of Adjustment in January of 2021, I purposely bought the property because it was a blighted property. The previous fraternity that was there, what was it, almost 25 years? They had to leave because it had become unsafe because of the ethos system that Mr. Murphy addressed. and so we owned the property on either side and had had reworked those and our office is directly well just slightly catacorned across the street to the subject and so we it made sense for us that we got one I've played when everybody's played Monopoly and it was in the middle and so it made sense so we bought it and tackled it it was pretty good project pretty pretty difficult project but as we the one of the main reasons i did it is because the zoning had changed for r4 for our existing zoning was r4 or is r4 and that increased the height allowability and also the floor area ratio and then we needed as mr murphy explained to come before the board of adjustment because of all the zero lot line things when we went we actually took this the roof off put a third story on increased the density on purpose and then put a roof back on and did the same thing in what was previously the garage so this was all up fronted and and as expected and we built it exactly as it was intended. So I just, I didn't know if that helps at all or not, but that was very much on purpose and as was approved. The other thing also is that this area is also a federally designated opportunity, or I guess it's designated by the city as an opportunity zone, and I wanted to mention So that gave an opportunity for me to come in to a blighted property like this with the opportunity zone benefits as well. So I guess the city designates draws where the opportunity zone is as well. So that was one of the factors that caused me to go forward with the project. Thank you. Yes, please, Mr. I was just curious how many members are in the fraternity and the people that would be coming and going, because I know they don't all live at the residence. Well, there are 67 members of the fraternity. So they all use that as kind of their home base and come and go? No, they don't at the present time, but if this is approved as the fraternity, they would be able to have chapter meetings here. and they'd be able to attend chapter meetings at this location and it'd be the same location same size meetings as the previous fraternity did there for 24 years the the number that number was not a issue for 25 years for the fraternity that was there because they had most of their members all fraternities have most of their members not living at the house living off-site so the the room i asked craig about this uh before we came up is the is the room that the previous fraternity used the sunken living room big enough to handle a meeting if even if we assume everybody attends the meeting which they never do and he said yes it is that's the way it was done and there's there's it's a strongly built building and there's plenty of space up there for that and many of the many that people would be walking there riding their bikes or they can park in the uk parking lot or the transit center lot i wanted to emphasize too that as the staff has mentioned to you parking we are approved for the parking we have here that's not an issue we are approved for the parking i know it's been a raise that's why we're addressing it and that's why i wanted to assure you that even if the ordinance doesn't require it practically speaking we have dealt with that parking issue as well yes miss plumley thank you i think i think it's commendable that this fraternity is striving to be alcohol free i appreciate that but in this case i definitely will support the staff i think their recommendations are uh on board correct thank you anyone else mr clark you i don't he's got the the same pain look on my face because i do i agree you know you you don't i don't want to be singling out fraternities and i just go to the if not this high-density building in a high-density zone behind a big stone brick wall with abundant parking, then where? You know, where are we saying we'd be acceptable to? Let me add to that because I'm not sure that what the future holds for that building, if it's not a fraternity house, what is it? Seems like to me it's going to be very dense no matter what. So I guess that's part of my reasoning that you've got a fraternity house that we're saying is not a good idea for the density purposes. But no matter what happens to this house, I think Mr. Harden will find ways to use it so that it is going to be dense. And we've approved it for a certain amount of density already. So I feel badly that we single out this particular fraternity that says, well, yeah, it's a fraternity, so we've got to dismiss this. So I probably would be maybe the only person that would say I would disagree with the staff, but I think that's the position I would take. Do we feel a need to make a motion or to take a recess and speak to Council if anyone so feels to make a contrary motion? Where we are on it, I'm trying to... You know, I kind of, in listening to everything, I feel as though it's going to be dense, it's dense area and you know you've built it actually bigger to be more dense which is what what the city wants I think parkings figured out I mean for for mr. Harden to grab both sides of the real estate and find parking elsewhere that's not an issue for me you know I think Brandon brings up a good point on on meeting space and gatherings and that's where you know that adds definitely the density or into the probably more of the issues with with neighbors. So that's where I struggle. I'm, you know, I'm fine as a, as a, as a house that a bunch of fraternity brothers can, can, can live in, you know, calling a fraternity house, you know, officially and, and the only difference is that, you know, they're going to be able to, to have social activities, meetings, you know, dances, I guess is what that, that said in that ordinance and then are in the, you know, in events for families. That's where it does add some intensity, and I probably would lean more towards staff on that. But, you know, it's close. It's close. There you go, Chad. You can follow up on that. I don't know if there's some motion. What do you guys want to do? Do you want to take a brief recess, Mr. Clark? Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. I think it probably would be appropriate that we have a slight discussion among us. There's no sense in making a motion to approve it if there's not enough support on the board. That would be a waste of our time. i'll make a motion well miss plumley before okay um you make motion i you know if i would need to see what the conditions are for i wrote an approval um because i you know i i've lived next to an off-campus fraternity house um you know i was younger then so i probably have more complaints now than i did then about it but you know we didn't my wife and i at the time we didn't have any real problems um they came and they cleaned up afterwards in the mornings and they had a party or whatever so it's not really the fraternity house mine is the um all the people that could possibly come there in the parking but i think miss carter makes a point that you know we're supposed to be designing the city for people not cars um and so if you guys could come up with some conditions i may be swayed able to vote to approve so before miss plumley makes a motion uh and forces my hand maybe the proponents want to talk with legal and see if they could come up with something that makes sense um if they could come together with a coalition um on getting this approved i mean I'm not going to fight it. So that's just my two cents. Okay, so maybe we'll take a brief recess. Ten minutes. Okay. The End The End Thank you. Thank you. Ready to reconvene? Is there a motion at this time? Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve PLNABOA 2233, 233 Kentucky Epsilon Phi Delta Theta House Corporation's request for a conditional use permit for an 18 bed fraternity house within the defined infill and redevelopment area in the high density apartment on property located at 236 Lexington Avenue. The following findings, with the following findings. Number one, the requested conditional use is appropriate in this location as this property has been used for density in communal living and fraternity is a permitted conditional use in the high density apartment R4 zone. Number two, all necessary public facilities and services are existing and will be adequate to serve the proposed use. Number three, the development is in a very pedestrian and bike-friendly area near downtown and the University of Kentucky. Number four, the proposed use will not harm the public safety, health, or welfare, and will not impair the integrity of the zone in which it is located because residential density of the property will not change. And this is subject to the following conditions. Number one, proposed use shall be developed in accordance with the submitted application materials and site plan. Number two, the fraternity house shall be limited to a total of 18 beds. Number three, social activities and chapter meetings, including non-residents, shall be scheduled after 5 PM. So moved. Is there a second? I'll second. Any further discussion from the board? Yes, Ms. Plumlee. Yes, thank you. I would question a condition that how many people are there at a time, have a limit. We might consider that as a condition. Any other discussion? I'd like to discuss adding a null and void condition. If this fraternity were to move, they couldn't transfer it to a different one. So state that for me, if you would. Ms. Jones, what language do we use? Ms. Jones is doing that. On the timing, did we also have the Saturday and Sunday on there? Was it just after 5 p.m. on the weekdays? Yes, I'm sorry. You are absolutely right. after 5 p.m. or on weekday weekends yeah yes so if we modify that it will modify that if we add this one as well typically mr. Gross the language that we use is it says the conditional use will become known voyage to the applicant no longer reside at this address so the applicant in this case being the fraternity if they were no longer residing or you could say operating but I mean they're residing that's what they're asking for then it wouldn't automatically transfer to another fraternity. Would you accept it as a friendly amendment to your motion? I would indeed. Okay. Would you be able to delete that and then change reside or operate? The conditional use shall become null and void should the applicant no longer reside at this address. Could it be operated? We could say reside or operate at this address. Good. Okay. Motion has been so amended. I guess do we want to talk about Ms. Plumlee's suggestion? Actually, I think we'd have to consult like the fire marshal or something to get a number of how many would be appropriate for that sunken room and the occupancy of the house at one time. You could add a condition that says, you know, that the occupancy of the public space in the fraternity house should be limited to whatever is permitted by the fire marshal. Okay. I'm us off the cuff kind of winging that, but, I mean, you know, then they could tell you, I'm assuming, what the occupancy would be to be safe, and they really shouldn't be violating that anyway. Is that number hanging on the wall somewhere in a building like this? I'm sorry? Is that number listed on a wall somewhere in a building like this? Well, this building is a little different because there's actually separate units within the building, and those are just the common spaces. And so I don't know exactly how the fire marshal, what their rules are about posting that, but we could make that a condition and then they would have to consult with the fire marshal about that public space and how many they could have in that space at one time. If you could legalese that, I would appreciate it. Is this something that we would impose? Isn't it part of the law that is in existence rather than us being specific about this? Yes, it is part of the law. But you can impose it if you'd like as a condition. It would just be complying with the law. Another way to put that would be to comply with all fire codes about maximum occupancy in the public spaces of the fraternity house. Ms. Plumman, I don't think it's necessary to do that because the fraternity has to abide by the law regardless. And we can put something in there, but if they don't abide by the law, it really doesn't matter. And it's something they have to agree to because the law says you can only have so many people in this room. Yes, so if you wanted to add a condition, you could add a condition that would say that the applicant will comply with all fire codes regarding the occupancy of public spaces. And then the fire code and the fire department would dictate what that is. That's already included without adding it, is what I think Mr. Clark is saying. In other words, let's say that, and totally hypothetically here, let's say that they have 120 people in that room. and the fire code says the size or whatever dictates their regulations, it can only be 90. The fire marshal can come in at any time and kick people out. I mean, they do it in this room. Right, right. They have, right? If that happens. Okay. But it's up to you all. Okay. That's my point. I think we're in agreement. Yeah, I'm getting it. So we do have a first. We have a second in place. We have a friendly amendment. Any other discussions? I guess I'm assuming that the applicant is agreeable to these. Thank you. Is the applicant agreeable? Yes, and we are inspected every year by the fire department, by the way. Agreeable to the other conditions as listed. We are agreeable to those conditions, yes. thank you okay so we'll take a vote The motion is passed. Good luck with your project. Actually, I know. All righty. At this moment, I'm actually going to go slightly out of order if it's okay. I'd like to call PLN BOA 22-46, that's Ms. Lauren Gilbert. Hello? If you could state your name for the record. Lauren Gilbert. Okay. And were you sworn in earlier and signed in appropriately? Okay. So we do have someone here in opposition. So if you could, if you'd give us maybe just a brief overview of your request. Sure. So I've been in the medical field for about 10 years, a nurse practitioner for four. And throughout my career, I've opened four brick and mortar primary care clinics and one mobile primary care clinic. some In full understanding of all positions within that office. And I am proposing the use of my residential space to have primary care office and see patients on an appointment-only basis. Those patients could be in-person, face-to-face, or I would also use the space as my telehealth hub home base. whenever patients call in and schedule an appointment those are customarily triaged for appropriateness for a primary care scope of practice so that's done you know every time so the front door of the property faces walton avenue and it is a multi-unit building and that front door is direct access to the office space that I am proposing and there is a door a doorway that is locked that accesses the rest of the residential unit so it is confined to that one space with that one access Let's see here. I'll be partnered with LabCorp, and they will do all of the specimen collection, handling of the specimen lab results that will be sent to me electronically through our EMR system. And there will be no exams or special exams or radiological imaging done on site that is customary for a primary care clinic in that scope of practice. Let's see. There won't be an additional lighting. The office hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the weekdays only. Adequate parking and no fluorescent signage of any kind out front. And there are currently, and Walton Avenue is kind of interesting because there are zones within multiple zones within that one street and there already are some dental offices and other various businesses located on there and yeah I just think this will be an asset to the community just a couple questions on items I didn't see where what's your intent for your patients parking yeah so there is on-street parking but there's also adequate parking if you see the markup of the space there is parking in the back and parking behind even you know in the very backyard area. How many patients do you plan on seeing at one time is this one of those where they're going to come in you're not going to have a waiting room or? No considering the space the confined space and I am the only provider and only employee it will just be one patient at a time yeah oh and telehealth visits so whenever I'm not doing the face-to-face appointments there I will be obviously seeing a telehealth patient there too I just had a question you mentioned it was a multi-unit property so do you live on the property yes you do okay so this would be when is it your house plus another apartment yeah so the property I told you the front door access is access to site a which is our residential space then it's divided in half but the side B is has one access on the back. They don't have any access on the front. Any other questions of the applicant? Thank you, Ms. Gilbert. We'll allow the opposition to speak. Sure. I should agree to the conditions. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. Good morning. Can you state your name and spelling for staff, please? Yes. My name is Zachary O'Connor, and my last name is spelled O-apostrophe-C-O-N-N-O-R. And were you sworn in and signed in appropriately this morning? Yes, no, I was. This afternoon? Thank you. It feels like this morning. It does. I'm here in opposition to this particular conditional use permit because I believe that it will increase traffic on Walton Avenue to the detriment of the neighborhood. Walton Avenue is a direct connection street between Richmond Road, Main Street and Winchester Road. Because of that it is subject to a higher than normal volume of traffic compared to the surrounding streets. There are no stop signs and no traffic lights between those two roads. However the speed limit is only 25 miles per hour. This already creates a fair amount of congestion at any given time on that road particularly during business hours this is compounded by several additional factors such as there is a elementary school within one block just over one block of the address in question that is ashland elementary school there is also heritage baptist church there is also two access points to the bell court neighborhood which is I believe just one or two blocks over it is also the access point for the parking lot for the central office building for the Fayette County Public Schools it is also the street on which several businesses reside including at least one CPA the noted dentist office at least one restaurant and a candy store that doubles as a postal outlet given that there is also only one crosswalk and no other pedestrian facilities, I believe that if there are a lot of patients who would need to come in person, and I know that the applicant stated that there would not be that many, but given that health care has become fairly important in the last few years, even more so, it is not out of the question that there could be a fair number of people who would want to arrive in person for healthcare services given that I believe that this would affect traffic on that street thank you we appreciate it and one other minor item I wanted to bring up I'm given to understand that the applicant also owns a residence within three blocks or so 905 Kramer based on what I've seen? If so, given that the applicant does currently live at the Walton address, I'm concerned that possibly the applicant would not necessarily need to continue residing at that address to continue practicing there since they own a property only a few blocks from there. Thank you. We appreciate it. And I guess, Megan, if you could look Think about that. Thank you. Amy Clark at 628 Castle again. This, I think, is a very tough decision because what you're doing is considering granting an office use with home visits for patients, a medical use to a residentially zoned property. And there is a limit of 300 square feet. and I'm sure that the staff has ensured that all the business operations, including the tele-whatnot, is within that. When you open the possibility of seeing a stream of patients, one after the other, with a brief interval between, because there's only one room, you're raising the value of the residential property to the value of a professional property. It's very hard to keep hold of affordable housing if you're letting the uses multiply, multiply professional uses on that residential housing, it will become a less affordable property in no time. Usually the way we do that is with a zone change. For me, the dividing line is seeing patients in the home. I think certainly telephone services are something one can do in the home, and it's invisible to everyone else. And it's wonderful to think, well, gosh, they can economize and have their work at home. Once you're seeing patients, that's really different. And then I begin to share some of the concerns the gentleman has. I actually use Walton Avenue and take one of those turns off it to go to church and choir. two, three days a week. Walton is already quite fraught. Thank you. I do have a quick question for staff. I'll answer your question first. Okay, okay. No, just regarding the home-based business title, I think I overlooked the part that we were actually seeing patients in here. I kept thinking of it as consultation as opposed to an appointment itself. But in the ordinance, it does not allow for medical or dental offices. Yes. So staff met with the applicant early on about how they needed to move forward in order to legally operate. her medical business out of her home. She stated that most of her business is telehealth, so she's meeting with people over Zoom. They're ordering off-site treatments, and if anything, she goes to their site to visit them to administer other more intense services. Because of that, she wanted to be able to have people come to her home kind of for initial consultations to kind of just discuss medical plans. She's got the better terminology but staff was very careful in our recommendation of approval to make sure that her home-based business was not operating as a medical office. We looked into kind of federal guidelines for services that are permitted to be administered by yourself and your own individual residents and used those as guidelines for services that she would be able to administer to her clients in her home-based business so we included kind of a breakdown of all of those in our staff report but we did look to the it's the federal health resources and services administration guidelines to services that are permitted to be self-administered by people in their own homes and staff found it appropriate that she would be able to administer that to her own to her own clients in her home-based business does that answer your questions kind of about what we were what thresholds we were setting for her medical services in home yes it does okay thank you I also wanted to address the residential component that was brought up in our proposed conditions with their approval we have the null and void clauses condition number five and it includes that the applicant reside at the address so that I think is covered in that condition. I have one more. Did you guys think about limiting the number at any one time on site in clients with those discussions had internally? I believe that our condition, well, I guess in our review of the application, because it's appointment only, We were not too concerned about a massive influx of clients all arriving at the same time and affecting traffic or parking. Just in our conversations with the applicant, they were going to be either one-on-one or smaller meetings with maybe couples or clients meeting together. So we didn't discuss or add conditions limiting a certain number of clients at a time because we felt that the appointment only operation of the home-based business kind of covered the potential negative impacts of too many people arriving at the same time. Well, my doctor's appointment only two. I can tell you appointments never on time. There's always a slew of people waiting before me. So that's just one concern I have is, you know. I guess the 300 square foot limit of a home-based business does limit the number of people that can stack up. in her home because she'll be able to she has to limit her entire operation within that 300 square feet. Okay all right thanks. How does I think we've you know we've allowed I guess child care and several other of these how is this different just the fact that it would be just an office? Yes essentially the majority of her business doesn't actually require a conditional use it doesn't breach into that home-based business definition but because she would like to have clients come to her home just kind of for her initial consulting appointments that kind of breached it into the need for a conditional use which is why we were very upfront and clear about limiting the services she's able to provide okay and then the last one just do we was is it implied about signage that there is not signage or how does that work yes home-based businesses are not allowed to have signage yeah all right thank you Are there any additional questions from the board? Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I did want to make sure the applicant had reviewed the conditions and were okay with the conditions. Okay. Anything else from the board? I will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I recommend approval of PLN BOA 22-46, Lauren Gilbert's request for a conditional use permit in order to operate a home-based concierge medical consulting business in a two-family residential R2 zone on property located at 165 Walton Avenue. based on staff's two reasons for approval and subject to their five conditions. Thank you, Mr. Needham. Do I have a second? Thank you, Ms. Tucker. Any further discussion? Okay, we'll take a vote. The motion is passed. Good luck with your business. Okay. That's okay. Mr. Needham's running out of his voice too, so Mr. Nicholson, you got to go quick, right? We'll take a quick three minute break. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we're calling PLN BOA 22-45. That's Independence Bank as the applicant. The staff has recommended this approval, so we will allow you to present first. Thank you. Again, Megan Jennings with planning staff. This case 22-45 is a request for a conditional use permit to establish drive-through facilities accessory to a proposed bank that is located within the defined infill and redevelopment area and in a downtown business zone located on properties addressed 366, 370, and 376 East Main Street. First, here's a vicinity kind of aerial just to give you some context of where this property is located. the three individual properties are outlined in red and are located kind of at the intersection of main street here east main street this is midland running up this way turning into winchester and then vine street runs this way along the southern side of the property and then there is another street water street that kind of kicks back around and runs adjacent to the rear of these sites so that's kind of the direct access fine street comes here and Main Street Midland here as you can see in this photo Thoroughbred Park is located here a very iconic Park in downtown this is also the old Harold leader building here which I believe the public school system is is looking at using that building for some of their services and then we have the field in main bank here the Carson's restaurant is immediately adjacent to the west just to help give you some context of where we're located oh also I should probably mention this while it's on the screen the Town Branch Commons Park is located here along Vine street and then goes up north midland it's a brown color on the map so kind of hard to see in this room but it does run immediately adjacent to these properties megan real quick before you jump to your next topic since this is three parcels they'll need to get a development plan from the planning commission or not i don't believe they need the development plan they can do a They can do a consolidation plat. Oh, okay. Yeah. Gotcha. Mm-hmm. So we can't just punt it. Right. All right. All right, so zooming in a little closer to the site, it currently functions as a gravel parking lot on the three particular sites here. And then also here on the more eastern edge of the site is the construction staging area for the town branch commons. The applicant is proposing a two-story bank building, just over 10,000 square feet, with a double lane drive-through. And then in addition to that, over 22,000 square feet of paved and screened vehicular use area with a total of 37 parking spaces. While the bank and the parking lot are by right permitted uses in the B2 zone, the drive-through facilities require the conditional use, which is why this is before you today. A little hard to see on this screen, I apologize to the audience, but this site does have some complicated engineering issues. The green lines are the stormwater facilities, and the pink lines, which are a little harder to see, are the sanitary sewer lines. So there are some connections through the site and on the rear of the site, which have caused, I guess they have inhibited development of this site so far. Included in with those utilities is a utility substation, which is located on site, and then also the Town Branch Creek Stormwater Culvert. So a big old pipe taking Town Branch Creek, which kind of historically ran along Vine Street and Water Street, hence the name. It's piped and runs under the site here. So that's kind of giving some context as to why this site being located in downtown is an underutilized gravel parking lot, especially for this gateway kind of property to downtown. town. So here is the site plan. They've revised it a few times, and this is kind of the final iteration. On the site plan here, the drive-through is located on the back of the property with the stacking kind of wrapping along the western edge of the building. You can see the two double lane drive-through there, and they also have a bypass lane, so traffic can come in through this entrance and bypass over here to get to this parking area assuming maybe all these parking spaces are taken or they just want to bypass the drive-through lane the proposed service points are there for the like the teller points and there is going to be a 24 7 ATM located in that outermost drive-through line The applicant has stated that they will have 17 employees on site and expect the drive-through to serve about 75 customers a day. The banked out typical hours of operation will be Monday through Thursday, 8 to 5 p.m., and then for Friday, a 9 to 6 p.m. hours of operation, with hours on Saturday being from 9 a.m. to noon. They are proposing a total of four access points with this site plan in order to serve the bank as well as the drive-through. They have two here along Main Street and then two on the rear of the property along Water Street. Just for note, Main Street is one way this way. Vine Street is one way this way. and then Water Street is one way, but it kind of comes back around and goes back this way, just to provide access to the rear of those lots. The applicant states that all four of these access points are needed in order to support the vehicular circulation through the site, especially since the drive-through facilities limit vehicular access, like from this side of the site to the eastern side of the site. The subject property has been before the board several times in the past and have been approved for drive-through facilities several times. The first case was in May of 2009. The board approved drive-through facilities accessory to a proposed pharmacy. And then in May 2011, the board approved drive-thru facilities accessory to both a pharmacy and a bank. And in January of 2016, the board approved drive-thru facilities accessory to just a bank. It should be noted that none of these conditional uses were ever developed as exemplified by the current state of the site. Staff does also acknowledge that there are several other banks with drive-thru facilities that can be found throughout the downtown core. However, like previous BOA approvals, the facilities were, or unlike the previous facilities, they were approved prior to our new pedestrian-oriented policy changes in association with the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Imagine Lexington and the physical changes associated with the Town Branch Commons. Furthermore, just due to the site-specific nature of conditional uses, comparisons to other conditional uses in other locations, like the other banks throughout downtown, are not necessarily appropriate. And in this case, the subject property's small size, the utility constraints, its unique location as a downtown gateway property, and its proximity on three sides of the site to major pedestrian facilities make this location less appropriate for drive-through uses than other drive-through facilities that can be found throughout downtown. town. Staff also just wanted to address that the development context on this end of Main Street has changed drastically over the past six years since the last drive-through was approved by the BOA. Additionally, comprehensive planning policies and development regulations have evolved and been amended to prioritize pedestrian and multimodal accessibility and safety, especially throughout downtown. While the board is not required to find that these conditional use applications are in agreement with the comprehensive plan, these adopted policies and the plan can provide context and give guidance to the board related to best planning practices. and the comp plan also represents the community stated goals for their city for downtown and for all new development. I wanted to just kind of overview the town branch commons it's a pretty new facility I believe they're coming to completion and having a big party this week so I just wanted to show the board kind of the extent of the trail system throughout downtown. Here on the western edge we have rup arena there's a huge park that they're working on and through the planning commission here the trail continues down vine street through triangle park and phoenix park all the way up to the west along midland avenue for your context our subject property with this application is here at the intersection of vine street and main street and midland so again here's thoroughbred park and our subject property is here the town branch commons itself is a public private park and trail system with multi-use trails open space parks and vegetated green spaces the trail itself connects to the legacy trail totaling in 22 miles of uninterrupted trail connecting the downtown core to the rural areas of fayette county also the trail does intersect with several parks throughout downtown and throughout the community including thoroughbred park triangle park and the forthcoming town branch park which i highlighted earlier here to the west immediately adjacent to the subject property is a proposed public kind of plaza area this is taken from the town branch commons master plan the image on the left kind of has a visualization of what they would like to see with a water feature they're respecting the historic town branch common or creek that used to that runs through downtown is just underground and of course with the multi-use trail that runs through the site kind of here there is a proposed sculpture or water feature immediately adjacent to the property and the applicant has been working with the mayor's office to kind of accommodate that potential plaza area on their site, which has kind of resulted in their revised site plan since they were first submitted. So I'll come back to the site plan again just to kind of cover a few things. Although adequate stacking can be accommodated on site, you can see here they meet the five-car stacking requirement for drive-throughs staff is concerned that the drive-through facilities are not appropriate on this subject property due to the concentration of traffic not just vehicular but also pedestrian bikes and even scooters staff also cannot support all four of the access points due to concerns about the amount of pedestrian and vehicular conflict points. The access point particularly that we have concerns about is this one here, the closest one on Main Street, or I guess closest to the intersection. And the applicant has stated that they need all four access points in order to support their internal circulation, especially since the drive-through facilities limit any crossing from one side to the other. All of that traffic flow goes from the west side of the site to the east. And so the applicant states, they need this access point so that people can get back out and onto Main Street. And of course, since this site is immediately adjacent to the town branch commons that I just reviewed, we are particularly concerned about their safety of all users or the safety of all users of town branch commons. We are also concerned about the lack of internal pedestrian connections throughout the site, specifically along their water street frontage. Since the larger parking lot is here on the east, there is a lot of pedestrian and car parking along. Water Street and staff had talked with the applicant about providing pedestrian facilities to get from this lower side of the parking lot to the western side, especially with drive-through traffic and the bypass line all kind of going one way against the flow of pedestrian traffic on that side of the site. the applicant stated that in order to fit both of the drive-through lines and the bypass line they don't have or lane they don't have enough room on their site to provide sidewalks along water street and so those are not currently proposed on their plan so staff is concerned about pedestrian safety just because there's a trail here doesn't mean people will walk from this parking lot out to the trail to get to the restaurants here located on the back of the adjacent property. So staff is just concerned about pedestrian safety within the site as well, not necessarily those running adjacent to it or just adjacent to it. So we are very concerned about the number of, or I guess the numerous vehicular and pedestrian conflicts on this site as the site plan proposes. So we are recommending disapproval of their request for the drive-through facilities. Conditional uses are to be properly integrated into the community. That's stated per KRS language. And the board is charged with assessing whether a use will adversely impact the subject property or surrounding properties. And while the board has approved drive-through facilities at this location in the past, staff considers the requested drive-through facilities incompatible with the new development context of the subject property. Due to the physical improvements adjacent to the site over the past two years, the new restaurants, the town branch commons, other just increased pedestrian activity in that area, staff finds that the drive-through facilities cannot be properly integrated into the downtown, heavily pedestrianized context of the subject property. And we believe that the use will adversely affect pedestrian and vehicular safety for users both within the site and along the adjacent rights-of-way. Furthermore, the comp plan, Imagine Lexington, does not support drive-through facilities in the downtown area. Many recommendations and policies included in the plan call out the need for pedestrian safety. And a specific theme or policy, sustainability policy number five, theme B, which is protecting the environment, specifically recommends discouraging vehicular-oriented development patterns, such as drive-throughs, within the urban service area boundary and especially in the urban core areas. That language is called out specifically in that policy. Due in part also to the environmental impacts of vehicle idling associated with drive-thru. Staff does also acknowledge the prevalence of mobile banking, especially as a response to the COVID pandemic. and it just kind of adds some context to the lack of suitability for the drive-through facilities proposed here on the subject property. And I will be available to answer any questions that the board may have, especially with our recommendation of disapproval. Members have any questions to staff? Okay. Okay, thank you. Must have did a wonderful job. We'll let the applicant come. Thank you sir. Thank you. Thank you. If you could please state and spell your name for the record. Thank you. Sean Spaulding. It's S-H-A-W-N-S-P-A-L-D-I-N-G. Thank you, Mr. Spaulding. You'd like to proceed. Thank you. So my name is Sean Spaulding, and I am here with Nick Nicholson with Stolkeen and Ogden, and we represent the applicant and owner in this case, Independence Bank. Also here and available, if needed, are Independence Bank representatives Stacey Berg and Phil Reine, as well as a representative with Axiom Architect, Dennis Wilson. So, starting off, I wanted to kind of give a quick introduction to what it is the bank is trying to accomplish with the, as we've already discussed, fairly underutilized gravel parking lot that's remained on this site. So Independence Bank is relatively new to the Lexington market, although they do serve a wide array of customers throughout the Commonwealth. Specifically, they have 29 locations in 15 different markets within the state of Kentucky. So Independence Bank is extremely excited about the prospects of adding this signature location to the already established downtown Lexington institutions. And as indicated, have been working in collaboration with staff and other officials on how to make this the best possible use for this particular location. Specifically, some of those things include, as you saw in the slides, actually allowing the city to use Independence Bank's property as lay-down area to help move along that construction process for the now-looking wonderful Town Branch Commons Trail. which admittedly was a little bit to Independence Bank's detriment, which caused delays in them being able to pursue some of this construction at a time when construction costs are at a little bit of a rise. However, the other things that Independence Bank is in conversation with, as pointed out by staff, is including and possibly in these discussions is including some of the real estate that Independence Bank already owns adjacent to this site as part of the Town Branch Commons expansion and also utilizing the site during off hours as potential trailhead parking for the Town Branch Commons Trail. Just really excited about being included as part of the trail system, which admittedly is one of the reasons why we were a little bit disheartened to see the disapproval come through. But our hope is that in seeing the presentation, the board will see that this is going to be a great use of a underutilized property. So this was a picture of the site before the Town Branch Commons Trail work began. You can see still gravel parking lot. The old intersection included a one-way bend from Vine onto Main Street. And that will actually come into play in a little bit. Now, you see the construction being utilized by the city as part of the development process. So, still dealing with gravel parking lot. And so, the property being uniquely situated as a gateway leading into downtown Lexington poses a lot of great opportunities for the property's development. And that is our goal here. So Independence Bank has been looking at this as how can we provide a really, really aesthetically pleasing, optimal use for this gateway property that doesn't overly commercialize the nearby public parklands. And so at present, this vacant lot is not what you would consider an optimal use. And right now, it actually utilizes five separate points of ingress and egress, which it's kind of a free-for-all in how it's currently being utilized with vehicles being able to park without markings. There are the current curb infrastructure is actually so low that most folks are able to basically ignore it entirely and kind of drive over the sidewalk wherever they decide. So as reference, the project has been through this conditional use permit application several times before. as staff indicated in 2009 for a drive-thru pharmacy, in 2011 for a combination bank and pharmacy, and as recently as 2016 for a bank drive-thru, all of which in the past have been unanimously approved after much deliberation and review of the site. So the current proposal is a two-story banking building with the accessory use of drive-through window on the first floor. And as staff rightly points out, the bank is currently entitled to build that structure as of right for the banking use. So we are solely looking at the discussion of whether the drive-through accessory use for the bank is appropriate. So, the site plan. So overall, this site plan has been laid out to maximize the harmony of traffic with Main Street, Water Street, and utilizing a combination of one-way and two-way entrances and exits to provide the best flow that's the best use for the site and the best interaction for all users. Notably, that includes actually reducing one of those points of ingress and egress that I had previously referenced. We have been working with staff on the site plan regarding access, circulation through the whole site and the drive-through facilities, and also been working in consultation with the Town Branch Commons team to ensure that everything that we're doing works in conjunction with those plans. So, as staff noted in their report, one of the items that they raised is questioning whether this drive-through use would have an adverse effect on the site and surrounding properties. Fair to say that given this site is currently a gravel parking lot without any real restrictions placed on driving lanes or parking lot lines and things like that, I think it would be fair to say that the site itself is substantially benefited by the site plan, including the use of the drive-through use. Additionally, limiting the secondary entrances and exits along here, the second entrance on main and this exit onto water as one ways, rather than the currently utilized two ways that they are, increases that safety feature and makes the entire site flow, so that way all users are aware where traffic is coming and going on that particular side of the property. Additionally, the recent improvements to Main Street, up along here, have actually also increased some of the safety features in terms of accessing the property from Main Street. So as previously discussed, Vine used to make a hard left into Main Street. That now has, in some circles I guess they call it road dieting, they have pushed the curb out and actually reduced the traffic flow coming down Main Street. However, Main Street opens up directly in front of the site for another driving lane, which would give all users a safer turning lane, essentially, to access the site, while allowing some of the faster traffic moving down Main Street through that now reconstructed intersection, essentially allowing a better flow while still protecting the individuals looking to turn into this site. Additionally, it's worth pointing out that when the Town Branch Commons Trail was being planned, beginning in 2016 and all the way through the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan for Lexington in 2018, this site had been contemplated for drive-through use. And additionally, these access points on Main Street were included. These are excerpts pulled from the comprehensive plan for the Town Branch Commons Trail. And you can see this very same kind of road diet here with the larger where it opens up to Main Street. And the site gets its access here. And the site maintains access from vine to water as well. So all of this when the city was going through designing, planning, anticipating future development for this site. This site was known to include a conditional use permit for drive-thru facilities. As we've discussed, unfortunately, despite having unanimous approval three times for a drive-thru facility, the infrastructure issues on this site had made prior development essentially the prior developers were unable to proceed with that due to infrastructure issues. We have worked with staff with these plans in mind and really trying to organize the entire site in a way that is extremely cohesive and uses this model in mind. And so you can see specifically what we're talking about with this kind of protected lane here and the overall access points contemplated by the comprehensive plan, which we still believe we're operating within as part of this development. So the bigger concerns regarding vehicular and pedestrian traffic interactions are realistically ones that would be felt with any new development for this particular site. And we believe that what we have laid out in our development plan is the safest and best use for those particular access points that still allows the maximum use for this particular site. So as previously discussed, there are currently five access points. And so adding to that safety feature is eliminating the access point currently roughly around this mark here, and then creating these two as one ways, substantially reducing the current access and egress points on the property. And so our view is that the actual amount of traffic modifications occurring to the site, specifically attributable to the drive-through accessory use, is in this case negligible in the grand scheme of the overall development and change of how this property will be used. one of the other points of conversation with staff had been the access along water to this secondary site here as you can see we have been trying to work on overall improving how access is done overall with around the site including totally improving the sidewalks on this main street side The issue, as discussed with the Water Street access, is to staff's point, there's a concern about vehicular and pedestrian interaction. As we reviewed the staff's request in basically creating access that leads from this back parking lot to what is the business on the backside of Carson's Restaurant, which is Gus's Fried Chicken at this point. So there is all this parking here that would also be utilized. And by adding a sidewalk here, our concern is that you're also adding the amount of pedestrians crossing all of this parking, crossing the public right-of-way at different points just to access this proposed or thought of sidewalk, which is, in our view, equally unsafe. So rather than adding more sidewalk here, again, staff rightly points out there's this brand new public amenity that is the Town Branch Commons Trail that can be used to access GUS's. And additionally, we have from our site a connection to the Town Branch Common Trail to more reasonably give individual users of this lot the ability to use the public amenity, follow it the way it was intended, and access farther down or farther up. But in either event, it cuts down on the amount of individual pedestrians crossing at all, which, as staff rightly points out, we want to try and limit to the extent we can. And so that was our main justification for not wanting to address that specific request. Otherwise, we have gone to great lengths to try to adhere to and accommodate as many of the staff's requests as possible. And to that point, specifically, we've discussed, as referenced, the additional improvements to the sidewalks along Maine. As I referenced earlier, the curb is virtually non-existent on main and needs improvement, as well as enhanced screening, enhanced landscaping that overall make this property's walkability substantially better than what it currently purports to be. Another major accommodation that this applicant, that the Independence Bank has in reviewing the site plan, The staff specifically asked for a few different redesigns on the site. That also worked around how the infrastructure is laid out. As staff indicated, the current infrastructure around and underneath the site limits where the building can be placed. However, we specifically moved the site and pushed it as close as we could to the Main Street frontage per request and also made that essentially a secondary building face that will look just as polished, clean as the main entrance on the front parking lot. And so this is the view from Main Street that individuals will have. And so this is not some back of house or side view. And so that comes at a lot of technical challenge in moving the building closer in terms of allowing some of the other features to take place with the overall site plan. but the applicant was happy to oblige in order to hopefully get some of these other things, make them all work in harmony. So it's specifically when it comes to the actual drive-through itself. So as noted, we're requesting a relatively modest two-lane drive-through, as opposed to what you, if you're driving around downtown Lexington, and you look at the other bank drive-throughs, you're seeing three and four all the way across drive-throughs. And so we looked at the site and understand that a drive-through, a more modest approach, was appropriate for the development of this particular signature site. So to that end, both sides of the building do a good job of incorporating the drive-through while still maintaining a pedestrian-friendly circulation around the entire site development. And so to this end, so one of the things that are raised also is generally whether drive-through facilities are appropriate in this particular development context in this vicinity. So kind of looking back to, so specifically when it comes to the prior point on the 2016 discussions about the 2018 comprehensive plan, we already know that this site was specifically included or known to be a drive-through use site when the comprehensive plan was being discussed and implemented. Additionally, one of the observations that we had was with respect to the conditional use permit for a drive-through facility. The comprehensive plan references a vehicle-oriented development pattern and discouraging drive, specifically drive-through businesses. And the modest two-lane window that is an accessory use to a bank, in our view, is neither vehicle-oriented nor a specifically drive-through business. In our view, we view those more as heavy fast food users and your similar chain type of users that are seeing high turnover and rely on their fast food, rely on their windows to generate a substantial amount of their flow and business. And it's our view that this kind of accessory use to a bank is not what the comprehensive plan really was intended to pick up on. As referenced in the staff report, we're only anticipating a maximum of 75 trips per day, which is on the absolute upper end of the spectrum. And as reference, drive-thru facilities are prevalent in downtown Lexington. Despite the changes to the comprehensive plan, viewing downtown Lexington collectively, you could still clearly say that drive-through banking is still a very relevant and important part of every banking institution or most every banking institution in downtown Lexington. And it's an important feature of what it is that they, of how they provide business or services to their customers. And so kind of sometimes it helps to kind of see the visualization. And so what we've done is we've marked just quickly, we found eight different drive-through banks just within this downtown corridor. And so you can see our site here relative to just roughly about 600 or so feet away, the National City Bank location. And I'll talk about that one briefly in a second. But you can also see just generally the downtown core is still very, very much represented by drive-through banking. An important note on the National City Banking location, that one is a very substantially similar layout in that it calls for an entrance to the drive-through from Main Street one way and exits back onto Water Street. The exact same as what we're proposing as part of our development plan. So that's already a nearby use. so we consider ourselves appropriate relative to our close proximity. Something else to point out, it's not actually represented on this slide because it was only just recently brought to our attention. The bank location here at Field and Main Bank here at Main and Eastern was, I believe, either has either installed or approved in the time since the 2018 comprehensive plan 2016. so they have drive-through facilities right or right across the street from uh what we are proposing all done within the same time frame of the comprehensive plan So all of that is to say we have looked at our site plan and laid it out with as much care and contemplation for pedestrian safety, vehicular safety, and doing something that creates a maximized, really optimal use of this otherwise underutilized parcel that also works in collaboration with the new town branch trail. So with respect to the, so Stack has already noted that there is adequate stacking available on the site. And so our site contains what we know to be appropriate for conditional use permitting requirements. and based on the applicant's own experiences and how they've operated their banks historically. Several previous applicants have received their conditional use permits but been unable to develop the site due to other operational and design constraints. And what we have presented is an opportunity to actually fully realize the potential of the site that currently remains gravel parking. The site's unique location in this context should be viewed as more of an opportunity to put something there that maximizes both the aesthetic and the practical user outcomes, rather than as a reason to never develop it. So looking ahead, our hope and our view is the drive-through facilities are provided on the site in a way that meet all of the necessary traffic guidelines, including circulation and stacking, and are designed in a manner that substantially improves upon the current status of the property. Specifically, as noted, the banking use is the best possible use for a drive-through permit. It represents relatively low flow in terms of hours and by comparison is not the kind of drive-through facility that in our view was what was intended to be avoided by the comprehensive plan. And so we think that including the banking use as an accessory drive-through within that general view would be a missed opportunity in allowing this specific development to go forward with the conditional use permit. generally another thing to point out is that although we are near the town branch common trail it is worth noting that the actual points of ingress and egress for the site don't actually cross the trail our points of ingress and egress are on water and main whereas the town branch common trail as noted by staff comes up fine and continues past the property so none of our actual driving access points across the trail. And so sometimes that might get, as you're looking at the site, some of that occasionally gets a little bit lost. But we wanted to specifically point that out. Generally, we just think that the site that's been designed by the applicant in conjunction with their architects is a great opportunity for this very underutilized parcel. We have worked with all relevant users, staff, the city, mayor's office, to try and provide as much accommodation as possible. And we continue to contemplate the use of this property for additional amenity space. it's probably worth pointing out or you're at least hitting on you know why why this is being requested uh or why specifically do the do they actually need a drive-through window because i'm sure that's probably going to come up and so more importantly it's it just provides a safe and efficient means for the banking industry in general and specifically independence bank to provide services to its users in the community at large it's you we we are pushing through covid19 and we are trying to get that behind us but it's important to remember that context and how we got here, and that drive-through businesses for a time were our sole means of accessing many different businesses, including banking, which during the pandemic was actually deemed a critical service because you have to have access to your banking institution when you need it. And not being able to provide that to Independence Bank's customers would severely hinder its ability to provide that critical service. And beyond the pandemic, it's not simply about filling that particular need. There are also the everyday practical concerns that make a drive-through a necessary functioning aspect of running a bank. including giving users the ability to access their services during inclement weather, snow, ice storms. There are also those individuals that are less able-bodied than us, so someone who says, well, can't everybody just park and walk in, is maybe missing out on a whole separate subset of individuals who it's just more convenient and it gives them an additional means of accessing their community bank. And so it's very necessary that this very modest two-lane drive-through be included as part of this bank's intended pursuit of making this site look pretty amazing. And so our view is we don't believe that the design plan that we've proposed provides an adverse impact for our site or for any of our neighboring sites. sites and we are requesting a similar to in the past the conditional use permit and giving us the ability to exercise that within two years to be able to develop the property the way it calls for with such an extensive investment and so to that end we have provided you all with proposed findings of approval just for the in the interest of full disclosure that language that we've provided to you all it substantially mirrors the approval language that was unanimously used by the board on the most recent conditional use permit approval and that approval would be subject to the conditions that we've provided in and that are listed above. And so I am happy to field any questions or defer to some of the other folks as well. Okay, thank you. Members, that was a lot. Do we have any questions of the applicant? I'm thinking really hard. I did have a quick question. It's probably for staff. Regarding the previous conditional use, is it that there was a timeline that it expired? Because haven't we been saying that it runs with the property unless we add that null and void type clause to it. So per KRS statute, the conditional uses expire after one year if not pursued or constantly advertised as such. And since the last drive-through was approved by the board in January of 2016, it was never developed, and I don't think that there's been any intention to continue to develop that previously approved drive-through, so it did expire since 2016. Okay, thank you. We have some other questions. I think we have some public. Okay, okay. I will have comments and questions. Brandon likes to drop the mic at the end. Okay. If we do have folks for public comment, if we could come forward. And staff will also have a rebuttal after public comment. Thank you. My name is Clay Collier. That's C-L-A-Y, C-O-L-L-I-E-R. And I'm a resident of the east side of downtown, and I think we'll all agree that that gravel parking lot by Carson's is not the greatest use of the site. It's a sea of parking, and that's certainly not appropriate for this gateway to downtown, as I think it's been referred to for over a decade. Certainly, our downtown master plan has designated as such, and it should be treated, I think we all agree, with care and respect and forethought that should be relevant to that site. I'm also a frequent pedestrian. I'm a runner. I'm a walker. I use my feet to get around. And I can tell you that that Main Street, part of the block, East Main Street, Vine Street, now with Town Branch Trail, and Water Street, all three of those passageways are fully used as pedestrian, even Water Street. that is a prime pedestrian access for buses, for those people wishing to migrate through the block and get onto the bicycle or pedestrian trail. So it is a very intensive pedestrian use. I can tell you that whether it's four or five access points to the current gravel lot, that is a nightmare as a pedestrian, and the four access points that are referred to on the current site plan, the proposed site plan, also feel to me with the pedestrian experience that I have as a significant number of conflict points. And I'm also, as a pedestrian, familiar with how drive-throughs feel. And oftentimes you see if there is stacking up, you have cars parked in the parking lot, which creates an issue as well. You have to step out into the road, and that's not a great situation. I also feel that symbolically now with Town Branch Trail right at the nexus of this highly visible and trafficked point of entry to downtown. It really speaks to the increasingly pedestrian nature of our downtown core. I support that. I'm excited about that and I think also there's a lot of wisdom, research, and knowledge that has gone into the downtown master plan, gone into the 2018 comprehensive plan, and gone into the town branch commons master plan. And I know it's been brought up before by staff, but I would just like to read from the development criteria for downtown. Vehicle oriented development such as drive-throughs should not locate in the downtown area. You know, that's there for a reason. I know or I feel that the tenets of these development criteria may not be able to be enforced, but they are a guideline and they're there for a reason. I think we should all take that to heart and remember that. And I also feel that it is important that conditional uses are treated on a site-by-site, project-by-project basis. That's why hearings like this exist so that you can dig into the nitty-gritty about the pluses and minuses of a proposal. I fully support an intensive use for that site. I know a lot of my neighbors and citizens of downtown want something there. Just keeping it in a gravel parking lot for the future is probably not a good long-term strategy for tax revenues and for the use of our very valuable land. But I just wanted to make those few points while we're discussing and considering the proposed project. Thank you very much. Thank you. Amy Clark at 628 Kessel Road. I don't usually have something to say on every topic. I will say that I was here in 2016 and making the same objections and expressing the same concerns that the staff has expressed today, and I want especially to thank the staff for their care. I walked away from the 2016 hearing where a drive-through was approved on quite similar design, really frustrated, really disgusted, because I had presented, I showed the town branch trail and where it would be and the colored drawings. I showed the millions, tens of millions of dollars in public investment. We'd won a Tiger grant. We were in the process of winning another $5 million. It came out to over, I think it was near $25 million. And there was a request for a drive-through here, and I thought when it was voted approved, I thought we are not serious about having bike-friendly and pedestrian-friendly routing through the heart of our city. And I just thought, it's a sham. The Town Branch Trail is just one other thing that won't actually practically be. So I am begging you to do what I regard as your duty today and consider just very closely whether we can have a drive-through here and have the function that is now developed and in place for a much more pedestrian-friendly and bikeable area. And what I'd like to do is just point out some elements that I think are particular points of difficulty and conflict. First of all, it's obvious to say the applicant referred to it as having two fronts, and it looks just lovely what they've put for their magnificent two fronts. It could be a courthouse building or something. But the property really has three fronts. And the issue is, is Vine going to continue to be the back of the house forever, even though we've had this enormous investment in the Town Branch Trail? Are we going to run a drive-through along there? If you look in the corner, I think you have that plan, right? I didn't want to do that. Thank you. Yes. This button? It's really small. It's this guy right there. It's horrifying. Every single time I'm up here, this happens. Okay. If you look here, what we've got is it's sort of a four-way intersection. I would say five-way because Eastern comes in very close too and is interacting with the points of access on the plan. But if you look on this tiny part here, Midland, and then there's a wiggle and it turns into vine. We're not talking about an intersection that's an X. And then, of course, Main, and we do call it Main Street for a reason. And then Eastern coming in. There's quite a lot of new development. An enormous multifamily approved for Midland Avenue in the very near vicinity. There's parkland there. There's another, of course, the Met is developing the whole complex up at the end of the trail there. So the adverse effect on present development and future development in the immediate vicinity is very considerable, I believe. The Vine Street makes a loop and comes back around on Water Street as a one-way in the opposite direction. It runs only in the same direction as Main. And it goes right across the Town Branch Trail there. and there's proposed an in and out access. I'm even a little concerned that people looking at what's ahead, if they want to make that loop back to Maine, could noodle through here all too conveniently. it was pointed out that all opportunity for cross access between this side of the site and this side of the site is usurped by drive-through except then you have one bypass lane well down here you're down to not quite two lanes it looks like maybe it's two lanes It looks like there's going to be quite a squeeze point there. If someone is coming off Vine and intending to enter here, they have almost no stacking, if you will. There's very little opportunity to make this maneuver, And I would hate to see everything kind of pile up here while people pick their way around in this weirdness here. I don't think that there should be a drive-through that becomes a magnet for cars to make that exit off Vine, which is very near the intersection where everything comes together. I think that's a lot of conflict and confusion. And as I said, I hope there wouldn't be cut through traffic. This is a half an acre. The property is half an acre. To have two front yards, three front yards, one, two, three, four, five, six, six lanes, is it? How many ins, how many outs, four points of access? That's just too many points of access and confusion and conflict, but especially near what is the centerpiece of our downtown, the new trail. In my view, the sort of people who need or wish to do their banking at a drive-through are increasingly turning to do their banking on their app, on their cell phone. It's the same kind of technical, you know, you just do it digitally. I'm not sure that this is something that is needed to make or break a business here, but it could make or break the pedestrian-friendly aspect of the larger area. It's been mentioned that several propositions have failed here. It's certainly a complex and difficult site. It's a challenging site, but that's because it's a really remarkable and amazing site. Just think of having three faces to your business, your enterprise at this location. People coming from so many different directions, surrounded by parkland, at a gateway. It's an opportunity as much as it is a constraint. I would suggest that the reason the others never were built, never were put into use, never went anywhere, is because they all had a drive-through. and they thought the drive-through was what would make or break their enterprise. This is not an appropriate place for a drive-through. It needs a different kind of idea. I think there's still a lot of potential in this site, and I encourage that you not. There's one other thing I wanted to mention. If you look at the building and you count how many parking spaces are available to someone where they can go directly to the building without crossing lanes that access the right-of-way or drive-through lanes. You're left with just the seven spots in front of the bank there. The drive-through lanes usurp 13 spots, 13 spots which could also nestle against the building if you didn't have to have that drive-through lane there. How hard is it to park your car and trot in? It's not for everyone in every instance, but you have your cell phone for that. I really think that this design is very centered on the automobile, and it's to the detriment of all that we're developing in the immediate vicinity, entertainment, tourism, recreation, and safe commuting for people on foot and on bike. Thank you for your indulgence. Thank you, Ms. Clark. If the staff would like to do rebuttal at this time. So I have a few things to say, but I do know that Stephen Parker with Traffic Engineering would like to say something as well, so I'll let him go first. Absolutely. I'm Stephen Parker with Traffic Engineering. I fully support the planning staff. and this was a cohesive discussion that took place with this drive-through, and I can't oppose it more than that's how strong I really feel about stopping this drive-through. It just creates so many issues on this site. The second thing is the access points, and I don't want this to be glossed over. we're talking about an access point out onto Main Street that's dangerous. You've got a one-way circulation, and what happens with most drivers, when they exit a parking lot, they look in the direction of the cars. The problem is when I come out, I've got Carson's and everything else to my left, and I'm looking at traffic coming to my right. So eliminating that access point is vital as well. I don't know how you feel about the drive-through, but I hope you're opposed to the drive-through, and I hope you close that access point. As a reference to three, can this site support three access points with the drive-through? I've done some research and looked into existing sites. UK just built a credit union at the corner of Oliver Lewis Way and Broadway. They have one access point. They have a drive-thru. They have a facility almost exactly the same size as this one. Independence Bank in Frankfurt on US 127 has one access point. It has a drive-thru. The facility is very similar in size to this. Independence Bank in Frankfurt at 450 Bursells Road has two access points. It has a drive-thru. very similar to this circulation. Moving to a city similar in size to Lexington, Louisville, Independence Bank on Shelbyville Road has three access points and it still operates. So I don't think eliminating that access point at the detriment to pedestrian circulation. Potential circulation has increased dramatically just in the time frame that I've been in with the Alexa Faye Irving County government and it's going to become even more vital. The road networks and alternative use, mass transit and bikes and PEDS, just the projects that we're seeing with the urban county government that is the importance that access point along with this drive-through need to be removed from this plan thank you baby real quick i want which access point are you saying needs to be so the access point uh closest to the intersection of uh vine street and main and water street on the main street side for the main street side That access point right there. That's correct. Both? Well, how would, if there was a drive-thru, how would anyone get out? Well, how would anyone get out, period? I come out of the drive-thru and I come out right here. It's a 190-degree turn. So. so you'd push everyone into that circle everyone back around over to elm tree uh to water street well you only have one crossing you're going to have that crossing no matter what on water street what we're trying what we're trying to do is right now you've got one two three on the trail I get that, but it's only 75 cars a day for the drive-thru. The reality is this is over-parked for the use. This parking lot and this design is in discussions with the engineering firm. They said that they had designed this to serve Carson's as an agreement. So when the bank is closed, they have an agreement with Carson's that this will be used for their parking. That's good because I want to be able to park somewhere. I don't disagree, but you've seen the number of cars from Carson's leaving. Carson's parking lot is a train wreck. I mean, this looks like an approved. I guess my thing is we're looking at it. This isn't the best plan in the world. I'm not a huge fan of this plan. I think they could have done a lot more with pedestrian. Honestly, that five-foot sidewalk was a throw-run kind of joke, in my opinion. So I think there could be a lot more improvements on the pedestrian. But we're here on the drive-through aspect, and 75 trips per day is not that much. I live across from Scapa Middle School, and there's probably four times that many trips per day right across the street from my house. So I think this plan could be approved, and I totally agree with you there needs to be some improvement on the tradeoff. But I don't know if I could, I mean, I guess you're saying you don't think this plan can be salvaged with the drive-thru. the discussion that took place initially was we asked them to look at other sites and design differently there were some architectural changes but changes to the circulation in relationship to what you just said pedestrian things did not change. I feel you. I mean, normally, I would support. I supported the field of main drive-through across the street. I will support banks having drive-throughs. I just don't think the count is high enough compared to probably, like Starbucks, probably a 75 an hour. Correct. Correct. But realistically, based on the discussions with the engineering firm, we know that this site is not going to be used exclusively for the bank. And those volumes could be double or triple. Okay. Well, we'll let the applicant discuss that because that is new information. I'm sure they're going to want to rebut somehow or respond to it. and then okay yeah that's it but I think but I want to prove this plan as shown but generally I'm receptive and I would be receptive to them having a drive-thru but yeah they need to do people need to be able to get from point A to point B without having to walk through the parking spaces so okay thanks Stephen I appreciate it any other questions thank you I will begin by addressing the access point issue. As Mr. Parker stated, the access point on Main Street closest to the intersection is dangerous, as it is currently proposed. And the applicant has stated that that access point is needed in order to support the drive-through facilities and other internal circulation issues with the site. I believe that that only further supports the fact or proves the fact that drive-through facilities are not compatible with this subject property due to the circulation issues and dangerous access points along Main Street and, of course, in relation to the pedestrian context of this site. And as Mr. Parker was stating, the circulation through this site is not just for drive-through users. It is for people using the parking lot after hours. It is for pedestrians. Anyone coming through or accessing this site is a user and will be using those access points. And so the 75 customers a day for the drive-through facilities are not the only users we need to be considering when reviewing the site circulation as proposed. So I just wanted to kind of cover those issues right up front and kind of further supports why staff is not in favor of the drive-through facilities as proposed because of the circulation and vehicle conflict points. in their presentation the applicant also stated that this use as proposed is a better use than what it is currently functioning as and they even classified it as a great use of underutilized property that does not mean it is compatible with the subject property or appropriate for the specific site staff believes that the use as proposed threatens the safety of pedestrians and vehicles on site and along adjacent sidewalks and right-of-ways. And the use as proposed prioritizes vehicular users, not pedestrians. And staff has, as we discussed earlier, major concerns about pedestrian safety around this site and through the parking lot. The applicant also stated that the comprehensive plan discourages drive-through businesses in the downtown core, and then stated that their bank is not a drive-through business, but then stated that the drive-through is inherent with the banking business. I would argue that this bank is a drive-through business and is covered in that comprehensive plan policy that we referred to earlier. The other drive-through facilities throughout downtown that the applicant displayed up on their map, Like I said earlier in my presentation, those were approved before this current comprehensive plan, which was approved in 2018. So after any of the drive-thrus that were mentioned, the field in Maine or even the drive-thrus that were approved on this site, this comp plan was adopted after those were approved. and also this site is unique in comparison to all other drive-through properties or drive-through banking properties throughout downtown it has unique road frontage it has road frontage on three of its four sides and it is also immediately adjacent to the town branch commons which is not other banking facilities are not immediately adjacent to the town branch commons and then also its context as a gateway property for downtown. The applicant specifically mentioned the field and main bank directly across the street. Okay. Here on the aerial, the field and main bank is located across the street here. You can kind of see the parking area behind, and the drive-through facilities are accessed through this one access point on one street. And the circulation goes into the lot and out of the lot through that one access point, and it is a side street, Eastern Avenue. This site has access to three major traveled roads and the town branch commons and is special and should not the other downtown banking facility should not be used as a justification to approve a drive through here. This is a unique site. There are unique issues and complications with developing a drive through on this site and staff is not in favor of the drive through facilities here. the applicant also stated that they do not have direct crossing points from their site across town branch trail staff would just like to state that the trail users don't just stay on the trail they get off on the sidewalks they get off on the roads the trail only increases and it provides a more safe area for bicyclists and pedestrians and the access points on water street and on main street are all conflict points for pedestrians and other multimodal users so even though it does the site does not directly cross the trail there are still issues and conflict points with the pedestrians especially the increased usership in this part of downtown The sidewalk along Water Street, the applicant stated that if they provided the sidewalk, then all of these people parking their cars along Water Street would have to cross the street in order to use the sidewalk, and that's dangerous. As of right now, they have no safe space to even go. A sidewalk is needed to provide a protected elevated space for the pedestrians to cross the site. Their argument that not providing it, I guess their argument that providing it only encourages the people parking their car here on Water Street to cross the street is kind of ridiculous, as those users will have to cross the street anyway in order to access the restaurant businesses here or even the subject property. So staff is definitely still concerned about internal pedestrian connections and here especially along their Water Street frontage. I believe those are the main points that I would like to hit now. If the board has any questions for staff, I'll be happy to answer them. I do. Just a quick question. So this is a lot, and we're talking a lot about the access points and the other, we'll still let the applicant discuss maybe the other proposed uses that we weren't discussing previously. But if we remove the drive-through component of it, I mean, the access points still exist, the number of parking still exists, that traffic that flows through and from, whether it's for carsons or if they're using it after hours to access the town branch, I mean, all those things still exist. The drive-through itself is just adding 75 additional cars that we're pointing in a different direction. And it sounds like there's the other issues that I'm not disagreeing with, you know, about sidewalk and those types of things. those aren't the things that we're supposed to make a decision on today, right? We're supposed to make a decision on the drive-thru. I'm going to just interrupt and answer for Megan. But I think on the pedestrian aspects, it's a trade-off. They want the drive-thru, and we can say we want this to be more pedestrian. Oh, yeah, absolutely. But that's what Mr. Parker, my point was. Those other parts would still be. It looks like they could do it without the drive-through if they wanted to. And so can't we find a way to move this forward? I see. If it was going to be, like, for example, like, I won't vote for this plan, but I don't know if we continue in the staff and the applicant talk, maybe they can come up with something that looks more palatable for pedestrian safety. so i'm with you all right but meghan you may answer now but that was fine that's why we bring brandon that's why we let him stay we would have got rid of him already yeah um to answer your question raquel if the drive-through facilities were not included on the plan they would have more room here to address their circulation issues they would maybe be able to provide two-way traffic here i mean i'm definitely not a site designer i'm not proposing anything of how they need to react, but they have a bit more flexibility maybe even to rotate the building to more face Main Street. There's just a little bit more flexibility to address the design issues of the site if these drive-through facilities were not a part of the picture. Okay. Okay. Yeah, it just, it surprised me a little bit, too, that the multiple access points were more of a concern with the drive-through than not, because we've looked at some drive-throughs that our main issue was there was no other way in and out, and we see them trying to squeeze cars in and stack cars up. And so I had thought that that was for the flow of the traffic, the multiple access points was actually a plus for the drive-through. But we don't think so in this case. I think this site is very unique. It's on Main Street. It's on Vine Street. It's on Water Street. I think that site context changes staff's perspective on the access points when it comes to this particular drive-through as proposed. Okay. Thank you. Let me add, I think that's a really good point, that this is a very unusual site, and that's part of our problem. But whatever is going here is going to have some of the same problems, regardless. any bank that would build a major structure in a downtown or suburban area without a drive-thru, I wouldn't want my money there because they're not very smart. I think the drive-thru is imperative if the applicant decides to do this, or we permit that, I guess. but I would be interested to know if there's some compromises that could be made and maybe the applicant can speak to that. Any other questions? I can let the applicant speak if not. Okay, thank you. Good evening, Nick Nicholson. Let me try to cut through some of the noise on this. One point of clarification, the 75, that number of trips, we basically maxed out what our possible worst-case daily trip was in order to give that to you all. Similar locations in Louisville and Frankfurt are more about 30 to 40 per daily trip. Part of the frustration here is, once again, we're dealing with a lot of different bodies. We're dealing with mayor's office. We're dealing with town branch commons. we're also dealing with planning staff traffic engineering and just how a a normal development plan would be trying to kind of address several different concerns we specifically were told by the town branch trail with that access point on main street was necessary not only is it in the plans for the actual town branch trail but if that does not exist all traffic is pushed to water Street for this entire site and will then cross the trail. We are trying to limit the number of trail crossings across the board. We want to protect the trail. We are talking with the mayor's office about grants. We're talking about dedicating additional square footage in order to give them the kind of splash park area. We have already agreed to pedestrian improvements, enhanced landscaping across the board. We care more about the Town Branch Trail and and making sure that it is a successful part of this site than anything else. It's why we've been basically dedicating that entire front area to act as a trailhead in order to allow people to access this site. We want to be a basically valuable member of this community. We learned from the previous owner of this site. This trail doesn't exist without Phil Holaback in this site. He agreed to a land swap in order to make this a reality. We're trying to continue that legacy and work with everybody we possibly can. We offer to put in a sidewalk along Water Street that was going to have to be partially in the right of way. We still haven't heard from Public Works on whether or not that that would be an acceptable solution. We're happy to continue to work with them, but we already had postponed once. And as kind of Chairman Carter has already indicated, what we're actually here for is can we have a drive-through? Is this drive-through actually an adverse impact to the surrounding areas? We do not think it is. If that drive-through does not exist, we're just moving on to building permit stage. This isn't a development plan review. This is by right development that we can go ahead and have this put in basically with just building permits. We don't want to do that. We want this to be the best plan. We want to continue to work with all the different aspects of the government to serve their different views. We are dedicated to making sure this site is good for Lexington. As far as rotating the building goes, we are specifically told to focus on that outside gateway. That's where we were told to focus. And then we wanted to basically improve circulation. We are going to pull the building off Main Street in order to allow, basically, access around there to, again, limit access points, have better traffic circulation. We are told absolutely not push that building as much to Main Street in order to make sure that we are establishing the building face along Main Street. Completely understand that. We are happy to oblige that. While I understand Mr. Gross's point with regards to you want to see improvements, can there be compromise? We're happy to do it. We're just getting direct different information on with on regards to the different kind of access points and whether or not we actually want pedestrian infrastructure on Water Street. We are told that we are trying not to encourage any type of pedestrian traffic on Water Street. We want to push those people to the trail. Please do not put that there. We're also told we have to have pedestrian infrastructure in that location. I'm not sure what to do with that information. And so we're happy to kind of continue working on this if that's kind of where the board wants us to do. But at some point, we just wanted to put this kind of before you guys because it is such a limited question on whether or not this bank should have a drive-through that we're committed to continue to work on the site with the mayor's office, with Town Branch Commons team. We're happy to do it with traffic engineering. We're happy to keep on doing that. But we just figured it was time to find out whether or not a drive-thru that's really serving 30, 40 cars is having an adverse impact on the area when you truly are not talking about a change in access to the site in any way, shape, or form. One of the issues with regards to basically needing that access point on Main Street as well is the cars coming out of the drive-through. If the only egress to this site is Water Street, you're talking about a 180 to 200 degree turn coming around while traffic is coming in off Main Street. That didn't seem like it was a very smart answer to us, and so we didn't want that to be the sole means. To address Ms. Clark's point, there's not a way to access the drive-through from Vine Street or Water Street. You have to come in through the Main Street side. That's why we agreed to basically put one ways on the kind of far left side of the entrance and also on the pass lane. We're not wanting people to come in off Vine Street and try to basically loop into the drive-through. So I'm happy to answer any questions. I did just want to kind of cut through some of that. Phil, did you want to say something? Okay. I'm happy to answer any questions. I got a feeling I got some. Here's just one example. If you look at, it looks like your stairwell, the way it's set up right now, you pop right out into the stacking lane. There's no pedestrian crossing. Stairwell? If you look at the back of the building where the stacking lane is right here. Yeah. How do people get across without walking right through your stacking lane? So that's why we put in a sidewalk. So I guess they walk to Main Street and then they loop back down? Come on. Those are the things I'm talking about, Nick, are some of these pedestrian things. On this side of the building. So I'm not sure what they're- So there won't be any doors at all from that side of the building. So the public entrances are here in Heathrow. Okay. reason why some of this parking was also requested is i don't know if you all know about this but carson's kind of uses a lot of this site right now uh and so they have very much a vested interest in having as much parking on this site and we're just trying to be a good neighbor uh in that regards as well so the gap there is not a door right there no i do not believe so and then i guess where you mentioned your arson's is carson's going to be using that is not cool okay okay and this carson's going to be using this lot um we're working with them um right now they have uh they they have a what they believe is a lease um without any lease payments to uh have free reign on the site and so we're working on how to deal with once this this project comes in line how we can also still allow them to have some some use for parking needs because we understand that this has become a major hub for parking in this area we can't deny that this is phil reining the chief risk officer uh with independence bank okay were you here to be sworn in i was not okay i was here if it didn't get okay if you'll raise your right hand swear to tell the truth maybe not the whole truth because we don't have that much time always will yeah thank you again my name is phil ronnie i'm with the bank and i am in charge of all of our market development so i i stand before you guys and i've done so in many other cities around the state as well so that's been louisville and st matthews so we're accustomed to to having these questions and I appreciate your all's time and I know where it's been lengthy. But I did want to address a few of the things that Brandon and Mr. Clark and some of the other, or Mr. Gross and some of the other people brought up. And any questions you might have about Independence Bank, I'll be happy to answer as much as I can. So the question with respect to ingress-egress on the back side, that has actually changed. We do not have directly into the path of the cars that you see there. We do have an employee access point mainly for fire hazard purposes on the back side where you can see right there. And so the ingress from the top level will actually exit at that spot as well. And so together they would exit. that one location. So it does not, you know, the last car basically would basically be where that crossing would be, but that's for fire purposes obviously, and it's only for pedestrian or for employee exiting purposes. It would not be entrance area, it would be just exit only for fire purposes. Trying to think of other things you may have asked, but it has been our intent. I've worked with Brandy Preacher with the trail, and I've worked with the mayor's office, and obviously when we had the property under option, we quickly met with planning and zoning and went through some various plans, and some of those things Nick has alluded to. We've been asked various things, and we've tried to adjust as much as we can to accommodate some of that. We do not have a lease in place with Carson's, but we're trying to be a friendly neighbor, to be quite honest. If we can do some things to accommodate, we're not required, but if we can accommodate, we're going to try. We met with Brandy in planning and zoning. I'll be honest, one of their first comments was parking. Why do you have so much parking? And I'll be honest with you, we rarely hear that, but we get it. We're in a different zone and things of that nature, so we understand. But after we explained a little bit of what we're trying to do out front and actually sat down with the mayor's office with the town branch trail, and they like the idea of being able to come in and people have their bikes and strollers and things of that nature on the weekend. And we're open to that and hopefully entice people to come in and use our services or our infrastructure that's in place there for the weekends for them to utilize. That's the intent. If it's not wanted, we can easily take that away. If it creates a traffic issue, we can put a gate on it. We're open to that, but we want to be a friendly neighbor to either the restaurants on the weekends or to the trail. But we also want to make sure that we're doing it in a safe manner. To that, at one time they did start moving a lot of our traffic to Water Street. We kind of balked at that, mainly because that is the majority of the trail traffic. And so you see that is why we want to retain the ingress-egress points that we do. We felt as if you bottleneck it to one location, that could be more of a hazard, to be quite honest. And so we get it that when you put pedestrian traffic and traffic engineers together, sometimes those don't mix. He wanted to push everything to water. Others wanted us to push up to Maine. We're trying to figure out what the right mix is, so we decided to keep the four access, take away one and have four. So just kind of in summary, some of the things that we tried to do. We're open to other discussions, but we feel like we've put together a great plan. It's consistent with what we've done in other markets. But more importantly, it's what we think is right for Lexington. We want to be a participant in downtown. Now, we feel as if this use for this particular location is probably the best use with respect to public safety. You put a hotel on here, you put a restaurant on here, and we understand what those numbers go to. I frequent your spots here when I come in on the weekends. I love the new one that's down there. It has a new hotel with valet parking, and you have restaurants with valet parking. You talk about traffic and safety issues, I see it. It's there. We feel as if what we're presenting for this piece of parcel or for the property to the gateway on the east side of downtown actually fits. And probably is the safest and best use for that property. Don't want to continue to discuss. I know you've had a long day, but anything that we could at least clarify from an IB perspective, I want to make sure I want to at least stand up and be here and be present to it. So be happy to answer any questions. I do have a quick question. Maybe if you could just elaborate a little bit. I know one of our main concerns is it being the gateway, and it is a very nice-looking building. It didn't look as much like a bank as I thought it would. But what are we saying we'll do up here in regards to Town Branch? So this is kind of what the plans were that has been shown in the Town Branch plans. And so we've been talking with the town branch folks and the mayor's office on how we make this a reality. Because right now, a lot of that is into kind of the parking area that we were showing. And so we're trying to work with them to figure that out. And if that changes, my guess is that that's a new concept. So all of that is still on the same property? A lot of this, basically, the gray is, I believe, the end of the right-of-way. So we've already been working with them, figured out the type of enhanced landscaping, make sure that that actually works. We put in extra pedestrian infrastructures on Main Street and from our parking lot to go into the trail directly so you can have kind of trailhead access. And right now that's not funded. And so we're looking at ways to talk to them about grants, talk to them about square footage. Because at the end of the day, it's in our best interest for this thing to look beautiful. That's what we're committed to working with the mayor's office. Keep going. Any other questions from the board? Anything additional from staff? I guess I would just like to reiterate that conditional uses are very site-specific, and the board is charged via KRS to review each application to see if it is a suitable use for the proposed location. Again, staff has major concerns about pedestrian safety on this site and with the drive-through facilities. Okay. Anything else? Are we prepared to make a motion? Do we need a recess to discuss any options or other things with legal? Do we just need to order dinner? I will just make a quick comment. I'm not against the drive-through. I don't think it's going to cause a massive detriment. But it does seem to be that this is a little bit of a mess, entryway and stuff. And I'm simple. I'm focusing only on, I don't have any problem with the drive-through, but it looks like there's a big problem with the Water Street exit. And I've been on that portion myself. People come off of Vine Street like they're entering into the pits at Indy 500. And you're taking traffic that's going from two and turning right and basically making a 180-degree cutback. It seems obvious that that portion needs to be cut off entirely. If you cut off the other side, and I don't know, I'd have to mention this to Mr. Parker, but it would lend the possibility of a one-way entry, flip your 45, and then a one-way exit kind of where Carson's is now without having to do any redesign. But just based on that safety part, I wouldn't be for this proposal today. But overall, I don't have any problem with the drive-through. So, like Mr. Grossman said, there might be an opportunity for a little rework that would essentially just be a little restriping more than anything. Sure. And we're happy to continue working with folks to kind of address the Water Street side. We just kept on hearing, please don't push vehicular traffic to water. Please don't put pedestrians on water. Like, go up. I don't like to do it. But we're happy to keep on working on that aspect of it. We just needed to know kind of yes or no, can we get a drive through on the site or is that out the window? It seems like to me there's less concern about the drive through than there is the egress, ingress. I'd like to propose a continuation. I would hate to see us turn this down because that's kind of final. And so I would like to move for a continuation of this project until the next month, which is November. I would support that. And I also have some comments on the continuation once we're ready to start talking about it. Is that a motion? I'll make that a motion. Is the applicant agreeable? Yes. Do we have a second? Thank you, Mr. Gross. So we'll first take a vote on the continuation or first discussion. Yeah, I was going to say, yeah, I think continuance is a good idea. I hope that, well, I know that the staff and applicant will work towards this. I want to get the yes, just my standpoint on this project. So this isn't a continuation. It's not a blank check for either party to dig in on things. And so that's just my two cents in instructions going forward. I would love to get this approved next month. So that's all I have to say about that. You are well appreciated. Thank you. Thank you. Any other discussion before we take a vote on the continuation? Yeah, I agree. And I think also traffic engineering needs to be involved. I appreciate what Mr. Parker said and concern for safety. and if it is you know the maximum of 70 cars a day that's just 10 per hour and that's not that many but with the employees coming in and out and different people coming in and out of that lot I think that traffic engineering needs to be involved. I agree thank you. Anything else? I think we're ready for a vote. We had a first by Mr. Clark and a second by Mr. Gross. Okay, we all agree that it's an worthy project and hopefully you guys can work with staff and get it worked out. Yes, yes. Wow. Is it really everything? All righty. So are there any additional items from the board? No? No? Is that enough? Is that enough? What about staff? Here comes Ms. Tracy coming in. You can't come at the end. That means I'm already in trouble. I know you've been here a long time, and I don't want to delay you any further. I just wanted to let you guys know that in the back today, Brittany Smith from the law department's been with me. And she's going to start backing up on some of these, and she'll probably eventually be taking over the board of adjustments. So you'll be seeing her at your meetings, and I just wanted you to know who she was and that you'll be seeing her a lot and what she'll be doing. We're normally not here this long, Brittany. Okay. Thank you, staff. Any other items? All right, our next meeting will be right here, same time, November 14th. We already have three cases on the diet, two postponements and a continuous, so you guys should be well prepared for those cases. And if there's nothing else, you are adjourned for dinner. Thank you.