All right, good afternoon. I just like my gavel. You guys... Actually, we will call this afternoon's session to order, and it is cold, so thanks for you guys being here. And I'd also like the record to reflect I wasn't last. I was on time because Brandon was after me. So what we'd like to do today, we'll go down the agenda just as it has been published. I will call each of the cases, make sure that the applicants are here and present, and ask if there is any opposition or any community comment on any of these items. Let's see here. If there is any opposition, then those will actually be heard on what we'd like to call the heard docket. As long as they're recommended for approval and no opposition, we'll get to those cases first. The first thing I would like to do, though, is approve the minutes. If the board has already received the minutes and had a chance to look over them, I'll entertain a motion or if there's any discussion that needs to be had. So moved for approval. We have a first and a second by Mr. Needham. Any discussion? Any items in the minutes? Okay, we'll take a vote. Okay. Might be our easiest motion today, but it has passed. The next thing I'd like to do, if anyone is here to speak for or against or to speak at all regarding a case, I'd like for you to stand at this time so you can be sworn in. A lot of people. Good deal. Thank you. Thank you, John. Okay, yep. Raise your right hand. See these guys know what they're doing. And please repeat after me. You promised to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth today. You do? Yes. All righty. We'll call you sworn in. I'd also like to mention if you have not, make sure you have signed up in the back as well. All right, so now we will sound the agenda. The first case is PLNBOA 23-20 Mulberry Builders. Is the applicant present? Okay. Is there anyone here to speak for or against this particular case? All right. And we have another case, PLNBOA 2321, Mulberry Builders, as well. Those two will be heard first. Next on the docket is PLNBOA 23-24, J. Perry Holmes. Is the applicant present? Back in the back, okay. Is there any opposition on this particular case? All right. You'll be number three, maybe two and a half, because two of them are Chris's. Okay, then I have PLNBOA 2325, Amy McSherry. Is the applicant present? Is there anyone here to speak for or against this particular case? You'll be number four. and then pln boa 23-5 jackson's wine and spirits yes sir i understand were you going to request a postponement today madam chair uh requesting a 30-day postponement uh to april 10th okay and this is the change of it's a good conditional use but we're requesting the postponement oh I'm sorry I was with you last time on this one and out and and due to Bruce Simpson's recurring health issues unfortunately that hasn't that there's not been much change about that there is a change recently I'm I'm going to become involved in the matter and that's kind of combined that's the reason for the request for postponement transition of legal okay all right um madam chair no discussion I'll move okay so I move that we approve postponement be PLN BOA 23-5 Jackson's Wine and Spirit LLC related to his request for conditional use for accessory drive through facilities at 1-406 and 1-408 North Limestone and it'd be moved to the docket for next month which will be heard on April 10th. Thank you. We have a first Ms. Plumlee has seconded. And we'll take a vote. The motion is passed. Thank you, Madam Chair. We'll see you next month. Thank you. Our next conditional use appeal is PLNBOA 23-13, the paddock. Is the applicant present? Thank you. Thank you. And this one has been, has a partial approval, disapproval, so we will hear this one on the complete docket. Okay, we have PLN BOA 23-22, Lexington Community Land Trust. Is the applicant present? Hey, I recognize you. You guys let your wint men in the audience out there? We do. And it has been recommended for approval. Do we have anyone speaking opposition? All right. One in the back. Do we? Over? Okay, okay. Well, we'll put you on the herd docket. That'll be number two on the herd docket. and then we have PLN BOA 23-6 and several following Whitetail Heaven Outfitters yes sir thank you madam chair Wes Harnock again on behalf of Whitetail Heaven Outfitters same request entry of new legal counsel the request though in this one is for a little different. We're requesting postponement for 60 days. With the stipulation that we'll maintain the status quo, there won't be any hunting or any of that type of activity on the property. The difference here is that the client is unavailable on April the 10th. So our request now, I guess that's for May 8th, I believe, would be a 60-day postponement of that one to May 8th. Okay. Mr. Woodall, did you have something as well? Madam Chair, John Woodall, on behalf of several objectors, would you raise your hand if you're here for the hearing today? Okay. So we've got a whole lot of folks interested in this, and this was to be heard last month, and there wasn't going to be another continuance. And here we are. And I understand Mr. Simpson's health issues, and I don't want to belittle that. but this matter needs to be heard and if it's not going to be heard today certainly within 30 days we're approaching another hunting season on april 1st with the onset of youth turkey season and this is something these people are suffering through in a real-time way so we would ask we're not going to be heard today that we for sure be heard in 30 days and with at the status quo be maintained that's what you know mr. Simpson and I talked about last Thursday if I could briefly reply I was gonna I was gonna make mention I'm understanding was that mr. Woodall was informed last Thursday that there be a postponement requested again we're status quo be maintained and the difficulty with April the 10th is as I explained which is availability for the least at least one of our witnesses why is he not able to attend attend on the 10th he's He's going to be out of the state, is my understanding. He's not going to be in state. I believe he has a commitment or something planned out of state on that date. All right. And if staff can remind me, when was this originally to be heard? Was last month the first time? Okay. It was scheduled for February. Okay. And we are stating in either case that the cease and desist would stay in place and no hunting? Yes, ma'am. Yeah, I just wanted to clarify what the status quo may be maintained. No hunting operations on the affected properties. Okay, thanks. Board? Well, is there any other attorneys that... Well, is that currently being abided by, the no hunting? You'll have to ask Mr. Harnett. Is the hunting currently being abided by, the no hunting? Because I feel like that's why we're here today. Right. Well, I'm here on a violation of at some point in the past. I can't represent that. Quite frankly, I don't know the answer to your question. the representation has been made to me is that it is, and that at least with respect to the next 60 days until we're back in front of you, that that will be maintained. Or at least there will be no hunting activity on the property. So under what authority can you make that recommendation, that assurance? The commitment of the client. I'm sorry we had shots fired at one of these properties a couple of days ago so we just asked that the status quo also mean no firearms discharged on these properties by Mr. McCauley or his guides or anybody under his supervision or control. Okay thank you if I could get staff to chime in for just a moment where we are here. So if there's a motion for even postponement, are we allowed to put certain conditions or specifications on? If they are agreeing to the postponement, then I think it's perfectly fine to put conditions on when you're going to sorry if they are agreeing to these conditions and i think that it's fine for you to postpone it with those conditions in place because it is noticed to be heard today so i think that's fair and i think my only concern is when we do these conditions is i don't think we could bind the property owners themselves i'm not sure if we've got the authority to say no one can shoot a firearm on their own personal property that they're using themselves So, Law, what are your thoughts on that distinction? Do we need to make sure that's clear on the record that we're only dealing with the applicant or the appellant as to that condition, or how is that going to work? I think that you're correct. It would have to be limited to the person the NOV was originally directed towards. If there are other individuals that are shooting firearms, you might end up with an enforcement question there, because as you are correct, we can't keep other people from doing that. But if the main concern is the applicant anyway, then I think you could tailor it that way you had proposed. Okay. Well, I think at a bare minimum, the appellant and its agents and employees will be prohibited from conducting tour activities, or essentially whatever falls within the definition of recreational outfitter on these properties in question. Now, as to the length, whether we go for April, I'm pretty sure Ms. Plumlee had a thought on that. Whether we let them go until May or we force one of the witnesses to get on a plane and fly back home, I could go either way on the length of the postponement. Well, I think that we are here because there's supposed to be no hunting activity on this property of any kind anywhere right now, so there should be no firearms, literally up in arms at this point. And the other thing is the applicant is really serious and considerate of board and government time, then it would be appropriate for him to be here in April. Thank you. Well, if anyone on the board has a motion. If it does help us point a reference, I do agree, and I do agree that 30 days should be sufficient. I know that the concern is the season that we are approaching and we do want to be urgent about making the decision that's before us. Well, if that's the general feeling of the board, then I'm comfortable making a motion for the one-month postponement. Okay, well then I'll make that motion. So, Madam Chair, I move that we allow a postponement until the April 10th meeting for PLN BOA 23-6, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18. and as part of that postponement, a condition be that the appellant Whitetail Heaven Outfitters be prohibited from conducting recreational outfitters activities, which would include commercial guided hunting at this time on the property subject to those cases. And then we'll have it heard next month. Second. We have a first and a second. That was Ms. Plumley, right? We'll take a vote. Okay. So we have agreed to a one-month postponement, so we'll see you back in April. Thank you, Madam Chair. I understand and we appreciate it. Thank you. All right. So I do know we have a lot of people interested in that particular case, so it will be heard in April at this point in time. So if you guys would like to stay and hang out, that's fine. If not, we'll see you back in April. I know we may be done by two now. I told myself. Oh, a different one. Okay. Okay. Oh, okay. All righty. Well, let's get back to the docket here. The first two cases we'll hear, PLNBOA 2320 and PLNBOA 2321, Mulberry Builders, if the applicant can come forward. And state your name for the record, please. Chris Mulberry. Thank you. like that's a projected voice yeah sorry that was a lot of people sorry about that everybody got that right it says speak directly into it so hey hey he follows the directions and it showed because the staff has also recommended this for approval has the board had a time to take a look at this and if there's any questions or discussions madam chair i move approval of pl in the plnboa 23-20 Mulberry builders request for variances to reduce the front yard setback from 30 feet to 16 feet and reduce the side yard setback for a deep building from seven feet to two in seven feet two inches to three feet in order to construct a duplex within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a planned neighborhood residential zone on property located at 421 East 2nd Street based on the staff's recommendation and the two conditions as listed. Do we have a second? Okay. We're first in a second. We'll take a vote on this one first. Ms. Tucker? Uh-huh. Sorry. Thank you. That's first motion has passed. Would you like to make a second one as well? I'm on a roll. There you go. Madam Chair, I recommend approval of PLN BOA 23-21 Mulberry Builders' request for variances to, number one, reduce the front yard setback from 20 feet to 16 feet, number two, reduce the side yard setback for a deep building from 4 feet and 11 inches to 3 feet, and reduce the rear yard setback from 20 feet to 11 feet and 8 inches in order to construct a single-family residence within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a planned neighborhood residential zone on property located at 423 East 2nd Street based on the staff's recommendation and the two conditions as listed. And we have a second and I'm sorry Mr. Mulberry have you had a chance to see both of those conditions? I have. Okay okay I forget that thank you. Okay. Looks like both motions have passed. Good luck with your project. Thank you. Okay. The next one on the dockets, PLN BOA 23-24, J. Perry Holmes. The applicant. Madam Chair, members of the board, I'm Rory Cayley with EA Partners here on behalf of J. Perry Holmes. Did we get the name reflected? Okay. Well, this one has been recommended for approval. Has the board had an opportunity to review the documents? Did we have a letter on this one? No. Okay. There's no questions of the applicant or any further discussion. I'll entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I move to approve PLN BOA 23-24, J. Perry Homes Incorporated requests variances to reduce the required side street side yard for a deep building from 20 feet and 10 inches to 3 feet and reduce the required side yard from 3 feet and 10 inches to 3 feet in order to construct a single family residence within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a single-family residential R1E zone on property located at 198 Pearl Street, based on staff's reasons for approval and subject to their two conditions. Thank you. Do we have a second? I'll second. Thank you, Mr. Clark. Thank you, sir. Motion has passed. Good luck with your project. Okay. The next case on the docket is PLN BOA 23-25, Amy McSherry's variance request. Okay. Hello. Amy McSherry. Hello. So this one has been recommended for approval by the staff. have you had an opportunity to look at the required conditions? Yes. Okay. The board had an opportunity to review. Now this one does have some citizen comments. This is the one with the letter. Okay. We can make sure we have an opportunity. It's in Grannis if it's not anywhere else. I'll see you next time. So have you had an opportunity to see the letter from the Homeowners Association or had any communication with the Homeowners Association? Homeowners Association? There was a letter from the Neighborhood Association. I'm sorry. No, we have not. Okay. Okay. Any comment or anything to address? I guess I'm not really following what they're meaning. It's a 10-foot-wide driveway just like any other driveway, so I'm not sure what structure they feel would impede visibility. Is anyone here from the association that can talk to it? Okay. Speaking of the garage. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. If you want to come to the podium and speak please. We were speaking of the access from the garage coming out onto Goodloe. It's a very narrow street parking on both sides. You got a park that is less than two blocks from there. So you have a lot of traffic of kids walking down to the park. Pulling out I think would be a safety issue for kids walking and having that garage that close to the street. You also have a church that is right across the street as well that on Sundays they do have a parking lot but there's an overflow so having a garage there coming out on the good low I think that what they're asking being that close to the sidewalk I think is a real safety issue thank you sir I'm sorry I'm sorry could you state your name for the record I'm sorry my name is Robert Hodge and I'm with the William Wells Brown Neighborhood Association. Sorry about that Megan. Okay all right. Is there anyone else here that wants to speak on this matter? Mr. Hodge you can sit. Thank you. And sir we were just seeing if we updated the plans to include a driveway in the back so that the cars would be able to turn around on the property. Yeah the city had us updated after talking to the division of safety and planning or traffic and planning and so this is the updated one so there would no longer be a garage garage door garage doors on good low due to the same thing so this is the updated one so as long as you don't have a concern with this but there wouldn't be a direct entry onto good low the garage would back into a concrete pad if i could ask and i know you guys are big in the infield development but i think a lot of this that we're doing is going to come back and create issues in the neighborhood in the future. What I would like to ask, if you don't mind, we could talk off and maybe postpone this to April the 10th or whatever your next meeting is, and you guys could come and present this to the neighborhood association. Or we can look at it and we can present it, but we have not had, we have not seen it, so it's not fair for me to make a judgment right now. So this was sent out in advance after the original letter. We were asked to send an additional letter so it was mailed out to everybody this has been passed by the division of safety and planning it needs of traffic and it meets all of the requirements and I'm Mr. Hutch I'm sorry I appreciate that so it is speaking to to the board thank you okay so let me let me let me say something real quick well hold on just a moment Mr. Hutch so what we'll do in this particular instance is for sure we want to make sure that we have connected you all so I think the process seems to be working here you were correct in your assessment the city and the powers that be did agree to that some changes need to be to be made there so um thank you guys for the input but it would behoove the um the owner of the property of course to to have these conversations with the neighborhood association and be a good neighbor and and be a part of the process that way okay Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, and we're happy to meet with whoever. We can connect. Wonderful. And real quick, the variances that are before us, do they have anything to do with the driveway? No. No. I mean. There was an original application submitted by Ms. McSherry that did involve the driveway. Okay. And so that original was reviewed by the Division of Planning and Traffic Engineering, and we made suggestions, and they amended their application. Okay. But today the variances were approved today. Do not involve driveway. Do not involve driveway. Okay. Okay. Okay. Yeah, so today's variances are regarding the front yard and the side yard. Okay. For the building. Okay. I'm with you. I just want to make sure I wasn't missing something. Yeah. Yeah. Very good. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions from the board? Okay. If not, I'll entertain the motion. Madam Chair, I move to approve PLN BOA 23-25 Amy McSherry's requests for variances to reduce the required front yard from 20 feet to 10 feet and reduce the required side street side yard for a deep building from 20 feet 10 inches to 5 feet in order to construct a single-family residence within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a planned neighborhood residential zone on property located at 228 Race Street based on staff's approval reasons and subject to their two conditions. Thank you, Mr. Needham. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you, Mr. Gross. Any other discussion or questions for the applicant? All right, we'll take a vote. Thank you. Your motion is passed. Good luck with your project. Okay. Now we're appealing BOA 23-13. This is the paddock. And what we'll do in this case, because there are some split approvals and disapprovals, we will let staff present first. On this particular case, on the paddock? Okay, we'll get to that part. What about the community land trust? The application for community land trust? Are you not here on that one? I thought you were here. Okay. Oh, okay. Okay, well, we might not be ready to stay. You sit back down. Let's have that one here first. We thought he was here for the... Can we just clear? that no one is here to speak for or against the community center? Community land trust. Community center. Yeah. Okay. Then yes. Okay. Okay. Perfect. All right. Where is that one, Brandon? Here we go. PLN DOA 23-22 Lexington Community Land Trust. If the applicant can come forward, please. Hello, sir. State your name for the record, please. I'm Ed Holmes with EHI Consultants. We're representing the Community Land Trust. Thank you. Did you have a chance to be sworn in, Mr. Holmes? Were you here then? I thought I saw you squeeze in afterwards. If you could raise your right hand for me, please. Do you promise to tell the truth and nothing but the truth today? I do. Thank you. Okay, this particular request has been recommended for approval by the staff. Does the board have any questions or concerns regarding this? Community center? Okay. I'll entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I recommend approval of PLNBOA 23-22, Lexington Community Land Trust, Inc. request for a conditional use permit to establish a community center within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a planned neighborhood residential zone on property located at 615 DeRude Street, based on the staff's recommendation and the two conditions as listed. All right, we have a first and a second by Ms. Plumlee, first by Mr. Clark. No further discussion. We'll take a vote. That's okay. You got it, Ms. Tucker? Okay. Thank you. Your motion is passed. Good luck with the project. Thank you. Bye. What did you do? You broke it? Okay. All right, Megan. Now it's your show. I will note the drilling has stopped. We did not do a good job with the drill then. Were we supposed to do something? I'm not sure. We'll see what happens. All right, so my name is Megan Jennings. I'm the BOA senior planner. And before you today, we are looking at PLN BOA 23-13. The applicant is the PADDIC. They are requesting two different conditional uses, one for a cocktail lounge and the second for outdoor live entertainment. Both of these conditional uses require a variance to reduce the setback from a residential zone. Oh, and the property is located at 319 South Limestone. Uh-oh. There we go. All right. On the projector right now, we have kind of an aerial view of the general vicinity. The subject property is outlined in red. It is approximately .17 acres in size and currently contains a 7,600 square foot mixed-use structure. The property is a through lot with frontage on both South Limestone and Jersey Street back behind. uses in the general vicinity are the university of kentucky campus with some dorms here a hospital located here here on the corner this is this is maxwell street and south limestone here on the corner is tin roof local taco then we've got the paddock and the subject property you today down here we've got the recently closed two keys and then continues down closer to campus it make it real quick um we had a similar case last month of the month before in where where would that location that one block down so that is up here on the corner of Maxwell and limestone all right thanks that was the 28 lounge conditional use application so also in the vicinity are a variety of residential uses in all shapes and sizes. Here I've kind of overlaid the existing zoning. The red, as located in the middle of the map, is the B1 zone. To the southeast is blue P1, which is the university and the hospital. And then just to the north, it's kind of hard to see, is an orange colored zone, which is an R2 residential zone that's where our variance is kind of kicking in with this application the proposed cocktail lounge and outdoor live entertainment required the variance to reduce the setback from a residential zone from a 100 feet which is the zoning established distance requirement to 35 feet as you can see on the map the R2 zone comes into the middle of Jersey Street which backs right up to the subject property so that 35 feet is measured from the center line of Jersey Street to the rear of the property itself. The R2 zone here, you can kind of see in the aerial, is actually mostly parking lot. The closest R2 zone structure is here on the corner and currently is a non-conforming commercial building that has insomnia cookies and then oneness sneaker boutique. The actual closest residential unit that is zoned R2 is over 100 feet away, I believe, up closer in this corner. Next, we'll just zoom into the property here a little closer so you can see some context of the site. This is the Limestone Street frontage. You can see some kind of outdoor space here. but there's also this outdoor patio area in the back or courtyard area the subject property is was issued a notice of zoning violation from the division of building inspection in December of 2022 regarding outdoor live entertainment that was taking place on the property and in response to that notice of violation the applicant has submitted the conditional use application in order to come into compliance with the zoning ordinance that zoning violation was for the outdoor live entertainment and also some indoor live entertainment in the past the paddock was only permitted as a restaurant and not as a cocktail lounge and indoor live entertainment is it requires either a conditional use for indoor live entertainment separately with the restaurant or to come in as a cocktail lounge. It's kind of a component of that use and so it's included in the definition of a cocktail lounge. I just wanted to state that the cocktail lounge includes the indoor live entertainment but the outdoor live entertainment is a separate conditional use. here is the property from the google street view out front you can see the paddock here on the right side of the structure historically this building has featured apartments on the second floor and two different commercial units on the ground floor typically they're home to retail or restaurant or bar uses this subject property does have a long history of commercial use and operations and has been before the board two different times the latest of which was in 2013. in 2013 the applicant called the other bar came in for a conditional use for a cocktail lounge now state this was the unit on the left side of the building received the conditional use permit in 2013 for a cocktail lounge the paddock has their certificate of occupancy was issued as a restaurant and so before you today the the paddock is coming in to expand the conditional use for a cocktail lounge throughout the entire structure there will no longer be apartments on the ground floor and it will kind of all function as one cocktail lounge as the paddock earlier this well I guess last year in April of 2022 the applicant did come through with a remodel permit in order to turn it into one unit and because the paddock was permitted as a restaurant or had a certificate of occupancy as a restaurant that remodel permit was approved but in order to operate more as a cocktail lounge they have to come through now with this conditional use here is the site plan that the applicant has submitted they have stated that they well first I'll state you can see here on the site plan they have a kind of a more formal proposed structure for the outdoor courtyard with a stage where the live outdoor entertainment will be hosted and then they do have the fire required kind of emergency stairs from that second floor I think those are the two kind of more major components of this site plan the applicant has stated that they currently employ 50 people and expect about a thousand customers a day they open that the goal of the expansion is to use this property and to provide a nightlife environment near the University of Kentucky as well as downtown Lexington for the requested outdoor live entertainment the applicant is proposing to host events in that outdoor fenced-in courtyard area to the rear they have the designated stage area and the fire exit stairwell and they have indicated their hours of operation the cocktail lounge will operate seven days a week from 3 p.m. to 2 a.m. and the outdoor live entertainment would operate Thursday through Saturday and go no later than 1 a.m. the applicant submitted a supplemental justification late last week and we met with them late Friday to review that new information but we were not able to update our staff report for this meeting and so I'll definitely let the applicant kind of cover that new information for the board today and then this is an aerial image of the backyard court area just so you can kind of see the existing conditions the applicant has currently fenced it in and the fence is eight feet tall and there it used to be a parking area but they no longer are required to have the parking and so they have fenced it in so here's the breakdown of the zoning ordinance first the definition for cocktail lounge and in which live entertainment is included in the definition of a cocktail lounge second is the definition for live entertainment which states any performance including but not limited to a patron of the establishment whether it's a regularly regularly occurring event and includes but it is not limited to singing dancing musical performance comedy acts magic acts all that type of live entertainment that you may find and then the last section is where these uses are listed as conditional uses within the neighborhood business B1 zone and also states the 100-foot distance requirement for which they are seeking a variance today currently staff is recommending disapproval of the conditional use for outdoor live entertainment within their initial application materials the applicant did not provide information regarding the types of live outdoor entertainment the desired levels of amplification the frequency of the events or proposed means to mitigate the impacts of the noise on surrounding properties they submitted that supplemental justification which I believe includes some information that addresses some of our concerns but I'll let the applicant cover that with their presentation however staff does find that this use of the outdoor live entertainment is incompatible with the density of residential uses in the general vicinity and considering ongoing noise complaints and violations staff does not believe that the outdoor live entertainment can be provided as proposed without creating a nuisance to the surrounding properties staff is recommending approval of the conditional use for the cocktail lounge we find that it will not have an adverse impact on the subject property or surrounding properties since the general vicinity features a mix of commercial residential and professional health care uses which are typical of the downtown area so we feel that the cocktail lounge itself is appropriate for this property along with that recommendation of approval for the cocktail lounge we are recommending approval of the variants for the cocktail lounge I'll click back to that zoning map really quick so forgive me so the variants here is from the center line on on Jersey Street measured 35 feet to the back of the property it's where that fence is granting the variance will allow the applicant to utilize that back courtyard areas outdoor seating or standing for the cocktail lounge and so staff felt it appropriate to grant the variance so that the applicant can utilize the property for that use these are our sub recommended conditions of approval in which we state the hours of operation and then also in number condition number three we state that outdoor speakers and outdoor live entertainment are prohibited and we feel that with these two conditions or prohibitions within the conditions will allow the cocktail lounge to operate without causing a nuisance for the neighborhood now there have been concerns expressed by neighbors about creating nuisances or noise disturbances with it like as operating as a cocktail lounge staff just wants to be clear that nothing in the zoning ordinance specifically authorizes the applicant to create a noise nuisance or noise disturbance if they do receive a conditional use permit today within the code of ordinance a noise disturbance is defined as any sound which endangers or injures the safety or health of humans or animals to a noise or disturbs a reasonable person or normal sensitivities or three in dangers or injures personal or real property so hearing any noise from a business will not per se constitute a noise disturbance because not that not every sound that filters from a cocktail lounge is going to fall into one of those three categories that I just list law enforcement inspects and enforces the noise disturbances and are able to cite if they agree regardless of whether or not the business has a conditional use whether or not that noise constitutes a noise disturbance and a nuisance so staff is recommending disapproval of the outdoor live entertainment but we are recommending approval of the cocktail lounge and of the variance to reduce that setback from a residential zone to 35 feet so that the applicant can utilize that back courtyard area as an outdoor space for the cocktail lounge I would be happy to answer any questions the board may have at this time I'd be interested know how I know the zone the R2 zone this is is close of course how close are they are the nearest residents actual people were people where people are actually living from our measurements on on GIS it was over a hundred feet away yeah I tried to find out from tried to look at that on on the Google map and I couldn't tell which which buildings were residential and commercial but it looked like from my from my recollection that some of them were probably 300 feet apart 300 feet away so it yeah I just I I just wonder if there is absolute noise nuisance created there. So that was my only question. So it sounds like the 100 feet is from the zone to zone, but not necessarily from actual residences. Correct. Okay. i did have a quick question regarding the the tenants the other commercial people in the area there are one or at least two other patios in the area that have outside entertainment correct uh can we do you know which ones they are or should i get the so in the in the past uh this property here which was the two keys property the Pazos which was located before that's not the right property it's the Pazos that's down further so down then on South limestone mm-hmm okay close to the intersection of limestone and Avenue of Champions there they they received a conditional use permit several years ago for outdoor live entertainment but it is significantly down south limestone i forgive me i'm not a native of lexington um the other i believe two keys has an outdoor patio area but i don't believe they have any outdoor live entertainment and then tin roof up here on the corner they have indoor live entertainment um and they do utilize the parking lot for some outdoor events but they do not have a conditional use permit for outdoor live entertainment they had come before us because we allowed it with they have a garage door right there inside that's right there their live entertainment is located inside they do have a garage door but the entertainment is all taking place inside and I don't quite recall what all the conditions were but one of the the public comments reference Cinco de Mayo is having outdoor music on their patio I believe they have an outdoor patio yes and and some outdoor speakers mounted the zoning ordinance doesn't regulate speakers because it's not a land use but the the noise ordinance would apply to those outdoor speakers do you know where that is in proximity to here that is just kind of off screen up here to the north. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions of staff? Thank you. We'll allow the applicant to come and present at this time. Okay. Okay. Okay. Could you cue me up there? Thank you all once again. John Woodall on behalf of Sundowns LLC, which is doing business as the Paddock Bar. With me here today is... Now see? Actually disregard. It's just a test. When we've been testing the biologists, please disregard all biologists or other others. Thank you. Unless you're losing, if it feels like you're losing, Mr. Waddell, we'll act like it's a real fight. It feels like my wife might be around in some way, but it feels like. Just kind of trick she'd arrange. In any event, with me here today is Steve Osborne, who is the general manager of the paddocks. This was set to be heard last month on your docket, and this board was gracious enough to allow us a continuance. when I just had recently been retained to help the PADDICs through this matter. The PADDICs initially, with their application, they filed a very short justification, which frankly didn't give staff a whole lot to go on. That's just, it's nobody's fault, but if you're not down here dealing with, you know, with this system all the time, you don't know any better. And they also had the backdrop of, Chairman Carter I think just raised this issue, the Pazos, now Two Keys site, was before you in 2020 with the same request for a conditional use permit for a cocktail lounge and a variance and to have outdoor live entertainment. and it was granted. It was granted. So they have the same CUP, they have a variance, and they have the ability to have outdoor live entertainment, and they have outdoor speakers. So that is probably a good reason why it was certainly justifiable for the paddocks to believe that their requests would be approved as well. So really the only thing I want to talk to you all about is just the outdoor live entertainment condition. That's really what it comes down to, and the fact that I suppose we have to have a separate permit for that. So I think probably the easiest thing is, let's just take a little walk down South Limestone Street here so I can orient you. Right here where this is circled, and you saw on the zoning map, this is where the paddocks is located. Of course, in 2005, the city embarked upon what was a fantastic streetscape project, which really kind of transformed that area. When I was in school, the Two Keys was more or less right next door to where the paddock is now. But now that the Two Keys is known as the hill, and the former Pazzo's location down here is now the Two Keys. And what is critical is that this area right here, which is diagonal from the current two keys, Pazos, that is a residential apartment complex. It's the hub. Your opinion please. Your opinion please. The alarm has been activated in another area of the building. While this report is being verified, please remain where you are. The alarm has been activated in another area of the building. While this report is being verified, please remain where you are. You will be notified if further access is required. Hey John. John, could you just take the mic? Okay. Your attention, please. Your attention, please. The alarm has been activated in another area of the building. While this report is being verified, please remain where you are. The alarm has been activated in another area of the building. While this report is being verified, please remain where you are. you will be notified if further active is required. Alright. Would you like some water, Mr. Woodoff? I'm okay. I'm thinking I might become the live entertainment here in a second. Your attendance, please. Your attendance, please. The alarm system is enacted in another area of the building. While this report is being verified, please remain where you are. The alarm system has been activated in another area of the building. While this report is being verified, please remain where you are. You will be notified if further action is required. Okay. Your opinion, please. Your opinion, please. I don't know. I don't know. While this report is being verified, please remain where you are. Can we take a quick five-minute recess? That works for me. Okay. I'll orient my map anyway. Stretch your legs just a moment. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. Thank you. I'm not alone I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I think we're ready to round back up. It sounds like we're safe. Here we go. Get everybody back in position. We're all good? I think we're missing one. Who are we missing? Tracy are we waiting on Tracy oh Tracy okay I think we're good all right so we back on meeting is back all right now I'm reoriented so here is South limestone here's the paddock down here is this building right here this is the new two keys this is the hub and then across South limestone is another dormitory okay up here at the paddocks as staff alluded we have the r2 zone that comes to the center line of jersey street and commissioner our gross asked the question about you know what's the nearest uh residence well if you go across this parking lot that's also r2 There's another home back here which is the closest residence to our knowledge, which is the Thompsons that live there. They are supportive of this request of ours. They don't have any problem with it, and they're the closest neighbors to us. The other, many of the other objections have come from across Maxwell Street. This is the tin roof right here. This is the hookah bar that's open until 4 in the morning. I don't know who's out at 4 in the morning, but in any event, somebody is, I guess, because they're open that late. Someone alluded, you all heard a CUP application of theirs last week. I don't think they have a liquor license yet, so they'll still be open until 4, but right next door is the Kimball House and these buildings that are owned by Foster Medical. Jimmy Foster and I grew up together, and there's also some documents in the planning file. of objection letters. And what was attached, though, are just reviews from their Airbnb. And if you look at those, I believe all but one of those reviews that's complaining about noise is complaining about the noise that goes on until 4 in the morning. The paddocks is not open until 4 in the morning. They close at 2 o'clock. And as far as who they are and what they do, I mean, staff alluded, There's actually 54 employees. Two of them are salaried. And they've been in business for a good long time. In fact, the current owner, Eric Ostrander, he's been involved with this particular bar for 18 of the 20 years that it's been in business. Steve, how long have you been employed there? 15 years. And never, this is very uncommon in the bar business, especially around a campus, not one ABC violation from alcoholic beverage control. Not one. Not one violation from the Lexington Fayette Urban County Police. Although there's been one primary objector, I'm not saying there's not been other objectors and letters in the file, but there's been one that's been very, very active. And notwithstanding that fact, every time that the police or ABC has been called, it has not led to one single noise violation. The reason why they're here, as staff alluded, it was a zoning violation because when it wouldn't work to go to ABC or the police but well let's ask the city we'll go to the building inspector and then it was realized oh we don't have a CUP that's what they were written up for not a zoning violation or excuse me not a noise violation not an alcohol violation this is a very well run bar next slide please if you don't mind Uh-oh. That is the tin roof. And what I have circled there are outdoor speakers. And this is right on the corner of Maxwell. And they've got that fenced off, and it's a right lively place, especially this time of year during the NCAA tournament. They open these garage doors when they have a band inside and the weather cooperates. Next slide, please. There we go. this is the Kimball house and this is the area where we believe a lot of the objections come from mr. thought dr. Foster's buildings are right here and right here immediately adjacent to the Kimball house is the hookah lounge the hookah bar which is open till 4 a.m. playing music so just keep score we've got the tin roof and the hookah lounge between the paddocks and Kimball house next slide please that is the hookah bar that's my glorious writing right there but that's right next to Kimball house which is Kim this which is right here so this is they are directly adjacent to this location they being the Kimball house and foster next slide please Ms. Carter, I believe you asked about Cinco de Mayo. Here's Cinco de Mayo. Also has outdoor speakers, also has a stage, also has performances there from time to time. Next slide, please. This is the hub, directly across from the Two Keys location, residential. Looking at it, down at it, next to it, over top of it, and everything else. Right there, right across the street. Next slide, please. this is uh directly outside the paddock there's a rear door there so there's the joe b's area you have to go all the way up the street here and the corner is um tin roof and then across maxwell there's a business here then there's the hookah lounge then there's the kemble house next slide tin roof again with the outdoor speakers next slide same thing next slide okay so all that said I talked about the some of the objections that that are in the file but But the hospital, Good Samaritan UK, currently, I know UK has some long-term plans for that facility. They haven't really said what they are yet. But right now, it's a hospital. And all through the day and night, there are ambulances, there's fire trucks, and whatnot that go up and down this corridor. I'm not belittling anybody that lives in the area, but this has been a college campus entertainment area for a long time. I graduated from the U.K. in 90, and during the 80s it was hopping in, and I'm sure even before that. All we've asked for is the same treatment that the two keys received, same hours of operation in terms of our outdoor entertainment and our music and our speakers, that being Thursday through Saturday night, I think the exact hours were Thursday 9 to 1, Friday 5 to 1, and Saturday 11 to 1 is what we requested. And this is another item of information staff didn't have when the initial justification was made. This is something I learned along the way because this is another thing that's changed a lot since I was in the bar business myself. well, as a laborer way back when. But their musical system at the paddock, and I suspect it's probably like this for a lot of bars, is not owned by them. They have what I call a jukebox. What do you all call it now? Okay. Still a jukebox, except it's on the wall. And it is wired in to the speakers on the inside of the building, on the interior and on the outside. The vendor has the maximum volume preset so that there's no way his or her speakers can blow up. They can't change that. They can't turn it up any higher than that. They can turn it down. They can't turn it up. Based upon the zoning ordinance definition of live entertainment and frankly how this particular issue has been handled by as far as other applicants we frankly should have no problem being able to do what we want to do which is to have musical performances there on the patio and so forth we're not asking you for that this is something else that's changed that that that dates me a little bit but apparently live bands and so forth aren't as important as they used to be all the paddock wants to be able to do from time to time in accordance to these hours is have a DJ on the patio usually that DJ would bring in his own supplemental equipment to supplement the sound system of the of the bar of the paddocks we're willing to wave that off so that if we have a DJ the only sound system he or she will be able to avail themselves of is the one we have. We'll be able to wire right into that so it has a maximum volume on it. So there would not be additional speaker systems and the additional noise that might create. We thought that to be more than a reasonable accommodation, given especially the two keys application and the fact that I understand that the tin roof doesn't necessarily have to have the conditional use permit or whatnot to do what they do, but nonetheless, go by there on any Friday or Saturday night. Finally, as staff alluded, under the zoning ordinance, us having outdoor speakers and folks sitting on the patio, That's not a live entertainment when we're playing pre-program music through our jukebox. We can do that through it to 11 o'clock subject only to the noise ordinance. If it was too loud then and somebody complained and the police came and thought it was too loud I guess they'd write a violation, but that's we can do that. All we're really asking you to do it seems to me is for to use a DJ and go for two more hours like everybody else is doing down the block. so we're not asking to be treated specially we think we've we've taken the the neighbors into consideration given our the extent of our request we're not asking you to give us what we think we're frankly legally entitled to which is to be just under the the stick letter of the zoning ordinance. And as far as one other point, it looks like we're being limited to opening. We can't open on Sunday. We'd ask to be allowed to be open on Sunday. Just if we can't use the outdoor patio for a DJ, fine. But that's kind of rough not be open on that particular day whenever other bars open that day. I'll sit down. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any questions of the applicants before I get public comment, or would the board prefer public comment first? Okay. Sir, if you'd like to speak now. Now it's time for public comment. Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. If we could. Hannity. Yep, we'll let Ms. LeGreece speak first. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Hannah Legree. I'm the third district council member. I know that you all have a letter from me. I believe in your materials as well. And I am speaking to voice my support of the staff's recommendation of disapproval of the conditional use request for live outdoor entertainment and as I noted in my written remarks I'm saying this as the representative of my many constituents who dwell in the area and in relation to what I believe are quality of life concerns for our long-term residents and for our residential property owners in the surrounding areas as you all can imagine I am the person to whom my constituents come when they have issues that they have difficulty getting addressed so for example when there are reverberations from noise from the existing use of the paddock for example they reach out to me and with the way that the noise ordinance is constructed right now we have limited means by which to address our existing opportunities and I've received a number of complaints about noise and the reverberations related to noise from the current use of the paddock and I believe that outdoor live entertainment in this venue would further amplify those existing challenges I know that you all can read the rest of my remarks that I've shared but I do want to say that I also support and appreciate the additional conditions being provided by the staff in relation to their approval recommendation for the cocktail lounge portion of this application conditions which I hope will be upheld and enforced So that's my generalized statement. I appreciate your time and your service. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good afternoon. If you could first state your name for the record. Excuse me, my name is Biff Campbell, Rutherford B. Campbell, but thank God my aunt gave me a nickname. So it's Biff Campbell. I live at 328 South Mill Street in Lexington. My wife and I have been residents of South Mill Street since 1975, and so we've fought a lot of battles to try to maintain the quality of our neighborhood over time, and this is not an unusual situation for us to be in. I'm a law professor at the University of Kentucky, emeritus at this point, and so have been there since 1973, actually, so I've got a long-term investment in the community. And the other thing that's sort of interesting is I grew up in small businesses. My father had a local drugstore in Hyden, Kentucky, a town of 500 people where we all gathered in the afternoons to drink Cokes and maybe other things along. So it's sort of an unusual situation for me to be in because of my long-term interest in small business and and my writings at UK and and my research has always been pro-small business but but there there of course are our limits on this so let me a lot of people in the neighborhood look very much like me i mean we have people there who made investments long ago in that neighborhood and and have you know love love the neighborhood and love the quality of life we raised our children there and and everything so so it's a these are real up close and personal things to us when these kinds of issues come up and I'm here only to speak to one thing or to just make some very brief comments to for one thing and that is the outdoor music I brought my computer and I have and if I can get everything working here right please tell me I can get it working right Okay. Bear with me, please. Well, knowing that my computer probably would not work, I took some notes while I was scratching around over there. The issue, Mr. Woodall and his group have made very good arguments. I think they've done a very nice job in arguing what I think is a very weak case, but I think done it as well as they can one of the issues and if I could only get up my come hold on just one second so not only just oh okay I don't know where he came from hold on all right you're not connected the web isn't sure okay my computer will not talk to your all's transmitter here so let me do the best I can with this. One of the things they have hit on is, which I think is sort of their Achilles heel on this, is the ability to control the intrusion that very loud music makes it into a neighborhood. I mean, as a given, I think everybody in the room understands that. I mean, you can't, you know, it is at the expense of the neighbor's quite enjoyment of her, his, or its property if you have these kinds of situations going on. What they do, and I think they do a good job on it is is trying to to to lessen and to look at the things they're going to do and I think if you look at this closely I think if you look at this closely now my computer decided to come back up this is on page two of their letter and and and and they they list some things there that that's going to eliminate the problem or demonize the problem one of which in the third line is they say that all of the music will either be a jukebox or acoustically performed music now everybody says acoustically performed music you think about you know a guy sitting around strumming a guitar with no amplification at all that simply is not the way that that live music is performed these days guys you may have an a cook I'm an old guitar player you may have a guitar that is called acoustic but what you either have to do if you're having live music is either run it through its own amplifier with the pickups that are on the guitar or on the other hand you have to run it through a sound board a sound board is a board that controls everything that is going on music volume etc and the person running the soundboard can up the volume of the guitar everything runs through that so you can have a stage microphone there that is picking up the guitar otherwise it's utterly useless because it is it is trumped but you know run out by all of the other instruments loud guitar players like like me the the other way you can make the other thing that will destroy acoustic is if you have a guitar and an amplifier sitting right there so the notion that the music that would be played on the patio would be quote acoustic it just it's not going to happen it's all going to be amplified and amplified significantly in that so the argument that that the noise that the noise level will be I'm sorry that the noise level would be limited to an automated devices jukeboxes or acoustically performed music is to me is is not accurate i know what they're saying there i've got a real acoustic guitar and i've got three electric guitars and and the acoustic guitar would not bother the next door neighbor if i played on my porch which i often do frankly sometimes thank you mr campbell i'm sorry i didn't give you your time limit when you start it but we do have a time limit for public comment okay so if you don't mind maybe to wrap up your let me wrap up I'm already coming it's the same point you cannot control music on the patio it will bounce around and come out however you do they also in that same paragraph talk about a system that is to be provided by a third-party vendor and all sound no matter how general goes through the speaker system that's the one with the soundboard but it is very it is amplified music you cannot in this meeting set the decibel level that the soundboard will be maxed out to and you there's no way for the city or for neighbors to monitor that we don't know what the decibel level would be that would not quote blow out the Bose speakers that sounds pretty loud to me and and And we don't know the extent to which an eight-foot fence will protect the neighbors, I would argue, is just not going to work. Good arguments, but the problem is if you start playing loud music on the patio, these kinds of efforts will not solve the problem. Thank you all very much. Sorry to take too much. No, no, we appreciate you. It was the microphone's fault. Absolutely. I didn't give you the time. It wasn't your fault. Mr. Campbell. Can I bring your mask? There you go. The applicant, would you? I think there's one other. Oh, we have another? Okay. Thank you. Hello. Darren Gulla, resident of Kimball House Square, 275 South Limestone. It's good to see you all again. Good to see you. Just a month ago, to talk about 28 Lounge, I've lived in my condo over there at Kimball House Square for 15 years and I never even knew this building existed and here I've been twice in one month. And oddly enough, I'm going to have the exact opposite position that I held last time with regard to the hookah bar. And that, mainly because of a proximity issue. That unit was literally 17 feet away from my bedroom, right across the driveway. as you can kind of see in some of the photos. This, I think I'm going to disagree a little bit with the staff's conditions here, in that I've been a resident there for 15 years. It's a loud neighborhood. I moved there mainly because I could just walk down the campus and teach classes every day, but I also moved there because I wanted to live in kind of a vibrant type of area. Well, it's vibrant and it's loud, as was pointed out here. Our neighbors are the university, large research university with 30,000 students, a hospital, caddy corner from where I live that runs ambulances 24-7, and the Bard District. They all make things loud, and I've kind of gotten used to it. It's hard to explain to people that don't live there. I mean, I've had friends from out of town visit and stay with me and can't believe I live where I live, but I've gotten used to it a little bit. And to give you an idea of what kind of the, other than the shrieks of the sirens from the fire trucks and ambulances, it kind of sounds like the parents and adults talking in the Peanuts cartoons. That's kind of what the whole neighborhood sounds like. You hear this kind of verberating in the background, but you don't know what it is. My guess is that outside of the music, outside of the sirens, excuse me, the loudest problem in the neighborhood is not necessarily the music, which that of course contributes things, but you've got a combination a collection of college students talking and they tend to talk real loud and they create a lot of just noise and so I would think that is if you want to try to eliminate that well then then there's no bar district anymore and I would I think that the paddock should have the ability to have outdoor speakers we've got four pubs on the on the block there that all have this capability that all have an outdoor footprint with amplified outdoor music and we saw that in some of the photos that were presented with speakers outside and so I think that we might be getting a little confused with this idea of outdoor music as was kind of pointed out here you know even though say that some of these other places don't have variances to have outside music like bands they're still playing outside music so I don't know how you could pinpoint everything on this one particular establishment on our block when every single place is doing it and yes it's loud and sometimes it keeps me up at night and I'm not happy about it but I think if you try to apply this standard to every single establishment on the block then they all have to shut down and there's nothing gonna go on in that neighborhood college kids are gonna go somewhere else they're gonna be in more danger and I'm not happy about that as a former educator but I would like some consideration and I I think some of the items that were mentioned here by the paddock are fairly reasonable. That's all I have. Thank you. I appreciate it. To be brief, Madam Chair, just a few comments and replies. First of all, I want to be clear for the record and to Dean Campbell. We are, not because we think we have to, but because we're trying to be respectful to the neighborhood and to those that have complained, we are waiving off our right that we would otherwise have to have acoustic performances or performance by any live band at our location outside. All we want to be able to do is have a DJ, and once again, that DJ would not be permitted to bring their own equipment. The sound equipment they use, they would have to integrate with our equipment, correct? Which we can control. You absolutely can control the decibel level. So I want to make that clear for the record so that we understand. And once again, we frankly think we're entitled to this. I don't see how in the world you grant a CUP in the same variance right down the street and then tell this user they're not entitled to it. It just doesn't make any legal sense to me. It's not fair. But nonetheless, there's been complaints and so forth. in response to the noise ordinance comments, we believe a lot of these complaints have come from a primary objector, but every single time the police have come, there's never been a violation written. Not one time. And if you haven't been in Lexington for a long time, you wouldn't know that the noise ordinance, the reason why we have a noise ordinance is it came about when the University of Kentucky decided to to prohibit the central distribution of alcohol at campuses, at the parties, at fraternity parties, at various parties. And when that happened, it did exactly what I thought would happen when I was involved in all that. It drove the parties off campus, didn't it, to Aylesford, Transylvania Park, where you would have different individuals rent homes at that location. The fraternities or whatever other group would pay the rent for that. And that's where they had the parties. And the only way to stop that was through the noise and party ordinance that we initially came up with. Point is, it didn't have anything to do with South Limestone. Nothing. But nonetheless, maybe the noise ordinance isn't strong enough right now. I disagree with that. But whatever it is, it is. And we've complied with it. So says our law enforcement. And I think we've come in here today and been a heck of a lot more reasonable than maybe we have to be. But that's what this process is, and we've tried to be accommodating of the neighbors, and we would just ask that you allow us to have what we requested. I have a quick question, Mr. Woodall. So you're saying that the staff has recommended disapproval of the conditional use for outdoor live entertainment. Yes. And are we saying that we're just striking that? Well, what I'm saying is the only live entertainment, as I understand it, and staff, correct me if I'm wrong, Pre-programmed music through a jukebox is not live entertainment. But if we have a DJ who is up there selecting what music is played, I don't know why kids today, I played in a band, so I'm kind of partial to bands. But apparently today that's not the thing. So that's all we're asking for is the ability to have a DJ on that patio. Okay, so you do still need them? Yes, that would be live entertainment. Okay, gotcha. And then also on the approvals for the conditional use that staff has recommended, the approval of conditional use for a cocktail lounge, it does have a restriction there on outdoor live entertainment and outdoor speakers being used. We do not, you are not wanting to agree to that. I would rather not, no ma'am. Okay. We're fine with the other conditions other than being closed on Sunday, if that's what that means. Did you all mean that to be the case? Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Let her clarify. All right. Okay. Any more questions of the applicant before staff does rebuttal? Yes, ma'am. I had a question about how many people would be in the back patio where the stage area is on the drawing. This is Steve Osborne. I believe our capacity on the patio through the fire department is around 420, right offhand from what I remember. It's 380 to 420 allowed on the back patio. And just the noise of them talking alone is louder than we can turn our music up. You can barely hear the music now, which is one reason we've never received a citation for noise. In your opinion, what's the noisiest? Bar on the street. I mean, I would rather not say because you're just going to go after that. Seems like you're on a witch hunt starting with a small bar, and then you're going to hit the bigger bars that can afford more legal fees. Tin Roof sets up bands in their parking lot. Football season, they bring in a tractor trailer with a TV on it with huge speakers for every home football games. I don't know how that's not live entertainment, but apparently a football game is not. DJs in their parking lot. As soon as it warms up, they'll have a DJ in their parking lot every weekend. The Hills has live entertainment. They have bands on their patio. I haven't paid it down to New Two Keys yet, but apparently they're approved. Their closest house is for me to that wall. The closest house to our bar is 150 feet. maybe less by how you guys measure but it's nowhere near the 16 feet from darren's house to the hookah bar or the 35 from two keys who has a permit to the closest apartment there it's just very confusing to us thank you any other questions of the applicant from the board Thank you. We'll give staff an opportunity. I just wanted to take a moment to clarify a few things. First, the 28 lounge application that you all saw last month, it was a conditional use for a cocktail lounge. It was not a request to have live outdoor entertainment. In fact, a part of their conditions of approval was prohibiting outdoor live entertainment as well as prohibiting outdoor speakers. So I just wanted to clarify that about the 28 lounge application that you all saw last month. Second, I did want to address the Sunday hours. They just weren't a part of the initial application materials, and so the hours of operation we included in our conditions of approval were what were submitted to us. So I think we would be amenable to Sunday hours. And then the DJ does constitute as live entertainment. And the DJ can entertain inside with the approval of the cocktail lounge. And currently, within our conditions of approval for the cocktail lounge conditional use, we do include the prohibition of the outdoor speakers. I think staff will defer to the board on the outdoor speakers component after what the applicant has requested and the testimony we've heard today. Those were just the few things that I wanted to clarify ahead of the board and, of course, answer any follow-up questions you may have. Thank you. Are there any questions for staff? Okay. Will the board need any time to recess or gather any conditions or are we prepared to make a motion as is? And it'd be three different motions in any case. Does it? You don't think so? Okay. Do I have to do a case? Do they have the conditional use of the variance? Okay. Okay. You know, I think I'm just going to speak out loud here for a second and see if I can get the board to see what they say as well. I mean, when I first read this, I was kind of in agreement with everything. It does seem odd that we are not consistent, and there's a lot of inconsistencies in the street. And so, you know, I don't know, and in each, obviously, we say each measure is, you know, we measure each on its individual merit, and so there's not a blank kind of slate that we have here, but we do have inconsistencies here with this outdoor live music. So I kind of feel swayed a little bit. I'm fine with the cocktail lounge approval. of the conditional use and then the variance. And then I think the outdoor live entertainment is something that the neighborhood's definitely here, but I think it's difficult to put it on one and not everyone. And I don't think we're in a spot to be able to retract what we've done. So that's what I'm challenged by at the moment for the third the third piece the disapproval of the conditionally use for the outdoor live entertainment I tend to have some of the same feelings and and I noticed that the staff indicates in her in the under the outdoor disapproval talks about entertainers not appropriate on the subject property due to the density of the residential use in the general vicinity and I don't see the density there an occasional house or two over a hundred feet away so I think that's somewhat questionable that I don't see the density of that and I agree that there's there is a bit of inconsistency here and it's a it's a college campus and we there are a lot of things we have to live with because of that of course I've made my living there for 46 years and so I can be proactive and that's at least understanding I think that if if the board was was leaning in this direction, I think I would see some need to take a research and perhaps think about pursuing this. Ms. Plumlee, where are you? Thank you. I would agree with my colleagues, and I think the Kimball House resident kind of summed it up that this is a part of town where this kind of action has kind of come to be acceptable, fortunate or unfortunately. So I think we just need to take a second look at it. I think if that's the case, we'll take a brief recess, and if someone wants to get with council, it seems we're leaning in that direction. Thank you. Chair Carter, before you take a recess, is it possible for miss Goddard voice to explain a little bit more about the 10 roof application since I'm sure yeah that came up during the conversation sure so I think that there were conversations about the 10 roof having live outdoor entertainment they are only approved for live indoor entertainment they've never asked for or received a conditional use for live outdoor entertainment we've not received complaints I think we are generally aware that they often will have UK games broadcast on TVs or projector screens out there I have not received reports of bands before we just heard someone say that they have bands so that is not a part of their conditional use that they are allowed to do the only other business that has live outdoor entertainment permitted is the old Pazos which is now the new two keys down closer to the South Limestone Avenue of Champions area kind of across from the dorms. So those are what is currently permitted as far as live outdoor entertainment. And Megan did touch on that a DJ is considered live entertainment because you have a person involved. Some of these other places may have things like TV screens or music or something like that, but that would not be included in the condition of outdoor entertainment because there's no live person involved in that. So that's kind of where some of these things fall and why there is a little bit of, not necessarily inconsistency, but just differences amongst the businesses. Thank you. And if we've heard a complaint today, we're happy to follow up on that with the Division of Building Inspection to ensure that all the businesses are operating within the confines of their individual conditional uses. Thank you. Thank you. So we'll take a 10 minute? Okay. Thank you. I love you Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We'll be right back. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to be the only thing. Oh, that's all that down. Bring about the down, baby. Oh, hey. Do you need a really day? I need to go for it. I need to go for it. I need to go for it. I need to go for it. I need to go for it. Thank you. session and if there's a motion we will entertain it at this time yes madam chair i'll make a motion um i move to approve uh plnboa 23-13 the paddocks requests for a conditionally use permit for a cocktail lounge with indoor and outdoor live entertainment and a variance to reduce the acquired setback from a residential zone from 100 feet to 35 feet within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a neighborhood business B1 zone on property located at 319 South Limestone. The staff are we recommend approval of the conditionally use for a cocktail lounge with live outdoor entertainment for the following reasons the proposed cocktail lounge should not adversely affect the subject or surrounding properties, as the subject property has functioned in a commercial capacity throughout much of its history. The general vicinity features a mix of commercial, residential, and professional health care uses, typical of a downtown area. And B, all necessary public facilities and services are available and adequate for the proposed use. And also the approval of the variants for a cocktail lounge for the following reasons. A, granting the variants should not adversely affect the surrounding subject to surrounding properties nor alter the character of the general vicinity as the area features a mix of commercial residential university related uses and be live entertainment will be limited to the interior of the cocktail lounge and located at least 90 feet from the nearest residential zone the use of the courtyard for outdoor seating and gathering with live entertainment should not create a nuisance and granting this variance will not allow an unreasonable circumvention of the requirements of the zoning ordinance these recommendations of approval made subject to the following conditions. One, the cocktail lounge should be operated in accordance with the submitted application materials and site plans, including the amended justification statement. Two, the hours of operation shall be limited to 12P to 2A, Monday through Sunday. And three, interior areas in which live entertainment is provided shall be soundproof to the maximum extent feasible by using technology with noise or other emissions not creating a nuisance to the surrounding neighborhood. Number four, all necessary permits, including the zoning compliance permit and a certificate of occupancy, shall be obtained from the Division of Planning and Building Inspection prior to the expansion of the use. Number five, outdoor live entertainment shall be limited to acoustic performances and DJs. Amplification shall be limited to that of the paddock's permanent sound system, including an electronic governor mechanism. Outdoor live entertainment shall not include additional speakers or other amplification. And six, speakers are oriented toward the center of the property or facing the rear of the building. Thank you, Mr. Needham. Do I have a second? I'll second. Additional discussion? Take a vote. Before we vote, should we make sure the applicant is okay with the conditions? Yeah. Sure. Sure. Very much so, yes. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you. The motion has passed as stated. Good luck with your project. I think that's it. All right. Do we have any other items from the board? Does the staff have any additional items today? Okay. Our next meeting will be April the 10th at 1.30, same location. Looks like a full docket already from everything we've postponed from this week. So you guys eat your Wheaties. And aside from that, the meeting is adjourned. Thank you.