# Board of Adjustment Hearing - June 10, 2024 > Auto-transcribed civic record · June 10, 2024 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6127 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6127?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2024-06-10 - **Last revised**: June 10, 2024 - **Length**: 33,103 words - **Speakers**: Chair, Nicki, Clerk > ⚠️ **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 June 10, 2024, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Branden Gross presiding as the meeting officer. The board addressed a substantial agenda of 14 items, primarily consisting of variance requests and conditional use permits from various applicants throughout the community. During the session, the board conducted 14 motions and votes while hearing 8 public comments from citizens regarding the proposed applications. The meeting demonstrated active community engagement in local zoning matters, with the board ultimately approving 9 of the 13 substantive applications considered. Notable approvals included variance requests from multiple property owners such as Jeromie R. Kirk, Barbara and Henry Hinkle, Jessica Sucik and Tara Stanfield, Lopez Construction, and the Leona Greer Estate, as well as conditional use permits for businesses including Poppys Flower Bar, Purple Door Management LLC, Blake Hendricks, and Christian Perry. However, the board also exercised its regulatory authority by denying three applications: variance requests by Demarcus Lewis and conditional use permits for Armenteros Property Group LLC and Leitha Pash-Lewis. Additionally, one variance request by Booker Group Investments LLC was postponed for further consideration. The meeting concluded with the routine approval of minutes from the previous session, reflecting the board's commitment to maintaining proper procedural records while addressing the community's diverse zoning and land use needs. ## Attendance **Present:** • Harry Clarke • Branden Gross • Carolyn Plumlee • Bob Sturdivant • Linda Tucker • Chad Walker **Absent:** • Raquel Carter **Late:** • None Six members were present for the meeting, with one member absent. ## Votes and Decisions The Board of Adjustment conducted 14 votes during the June 10, 2024 meeting, with all votes taken by roll call. **Administrative Matters** The board unanimously approved the March 2024 and April 2024 meeting minutes [timestamp: 00:00]. Motion by Linda Tucker, seconded by Harry Clarke. Vote: 6-0. **Variance Requests** Five variance requests were approved unanimously: - **PLN-BOA-24-00012**: Jeromie R. Kirk's request to increase driveway width from 10' to 20' [timestamp: 01:00]. Motion by Carolyn Plumlee, seconded by Linda Tucker. Vote: 6-0 with three conditions. - **PLN-BOA-24-00063**: Barbara and Henry Hinkle's request to reduce side street yard setback [timestamp: 02:00]. Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Chad Walker. Vote: 6-0 with two conditions. - **PLN-BOA-24-00071**: Jessica Sucik and Tara Stanfield's request to reduce side yard setback [timestamp: 03:00]. Motion by Bob Sturdivant, seconded by Carolyn Plumlee. Vote: 6-0 with two conditions. - **PLN-BOA-24-00074**: Lopez Construction's request for multiple variances including driveway width [timestamp: 04:00]. Motion by Chad Walker, seconded by Linda Tucker. Vote: 6-0 with four conditions. - **PLN-BOA-24-00075**: Leona Greer Estate's request for multiple variances including side yard setback [timestamp: 07:00]. Motion by Carolyn Plumlee, seconded by Bob Sturdivant. Vote: 5-0 with one abstention (Branden Gross) and two conditions. One variance request failed: - **PLN-BOA-24-00067**: Demarcus Lewis's request for multiple variances including accessory structure height [timestamp: 06:00]. Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Bob Sturdivant. Vote: 0-6. One variance request was postponed: - **PLN-BOA-24-00076**: Booker Group Investments LLC's request for multiple variances [timestamp: 08:00]. Motion by Chad Walker, seconded by Linda Tucker. Vote: 6-0 to continue to July 8, 2024. **Conditional Use Permits** The board approved three conditional use permits: - **PLN-BOA-24-00064**: Poppys Flower Bar's cocktail lounge permit [timestamp: 05:00]. Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Chad Walker. Vote: 6-0 with four conditions. - **PLN-BOA-24-00070**: Purple Door Management LLC's un-hosted short-term rental permit [timestamp: 10:00]. Motion by Chad Walker, seconded by Harry Clarke. Vote: 6-0 with four conditions. - **PLN-BOA-24-00072**: Blake Hendricks's un-hosted short-term rental permit [timestamp: 11:00]. Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Bob Sturdivant. Vote: 4-2 (Plumlee and Tucker opposed) with four conditions. - **PLN-BOA-24-00077**: Christian Perry's un-hosted short-term rental permit [timestamp: 13:00]. Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Bob Sturdivant. Vote: 4-2 (Plumlee and Tucker opposed) with six conditions. Two conditional use permits failed due to tie votes: - **PLN-BOA-24-00065**: Armenteros Property Group LLC's un-hosted short-term rental permit [timestamp: 09:00]. Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Chad Walker. Vote: 3-3 (Clarke, Gross, and Walker for; Plumlee, Sturdivant, and Tucker against). - **PLN-BOA-24-00069**: Leitha Pash-Lewis's un-hosted short-term rental permit [timestamp: 12:00]. Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Bob Sturdivant ## Public Comment Eight residents spoke during the public comment period, all expressing opposition to two proposed short-term rental applications. **253 Hill N Dale Short-Term Rental Opposition** John Strayly spoke first [timestamp: 14:00], expressing concerns about the over-saturation of short-term rentals in the area and their negative impact on neighborhood quality of life. Jennifer Bailey followed [timestamp: 15:00], reading statements from elderly neighbors who opposed the short-term rental due to concerns about noise and neighborhood impact. Gail Whitener [timestamp: 16:00] discussed additional neighborhood concerns about noise, parking, and the broader impact of short-term rentals on the community. **786 Bravington Way Short-Term Rental Opposition** Five residents spoke against the proposed short-term rental at 786 Bravington Way. Neil Conrad [timestamp: 17:00] raised concerns about parking and safety issues related to the property. Phillip Johnson [timestamp: 18:00] noted that the property was already being rented out and expressed concerns about parking and compliance with regulations. Amy Chappell Hamlin [timestamp: 19:00] voiced opposition based on traffic concerns and potential neighborhood impact. Betsy Luckey [timestamp: 20:00] opposed the application, citing concerns about maintaining neighborhood character and parking availability. Kim Justice [timestamp: 21:00] questioned whether the applicant actually maintained primary residence status at the property and expressed opposition to the short-term rental. Common themes across all public comments included concerns about parking availability, noise impacts, neighborhood character preservation, traffic increases, and compliance with short-term rental regulations. No speakers voiced support for either proposed short-term rental application during the public comment period. ## Contested Items Three development requests faced significant community opposition during the June 10, 2024 meeting, all centering on concerns about neighborhood impacts and compatibility. **Demarcus Lewis Variance Request** The meeting addressed multiple variance requests submitted by Demarcus Lewis that drew community opposition. Residents expressed concerns about the proposed size and intended use of accessory structures included in the variance application. The specific nature of the variances and the community's objections focused on how these structures would fit within the existing neighborhood character and their potential impact on surrounding properties. **253 Hill N Dale Short-Term Rental Permit** A conditional use permit application for establishing a short-term rental at 253 Hill N Dale generated significant opposition from neighboring residents. The primary concerns raised by community members centered on potential noise issues and the broader impact such a commercial use would have on the residential neighborhood. Neighbors voiced objections about how transient occupancy could disrupt the established residential character of the area. **786 Bravington Way Short-Term Rental Permit** Similarly, the conditional use permit request for a short-term rental at 786 Bravington Way faced neighborhood opposition. Residents in the area raised specific concerns about parking availability and the potential negative effects on neighborhood character. The opposition focused on how increased visitor traffic and parking demands from short-term rental guests could impact the residential nature of Bravington Way. All three contested items involved community members actively participating in the public hearing process to voice their objections to the proposed developments. The common themes across the opposition included concerns about maintaining neighborhood character, managing potential nuisances, and ensuring compatibility between new uses and existing residential areas. *Note: Specific timestamps and final outcomes for these contested items were not available in the provided meeting data.* ## Approval of Minutes [timestamp: 00:00] The Board considered the approval of minutes from two previous meetings during this agenda item. Board member Branden Gross participated in the discussion regarding the minutes from the March 2024 and April 2024 meetings. The Board reviewed the documentation from both meetings before proceeding with the approval process. No specific concerns or amendments to the minutes were noted during the discussion. Following the review, the Board approved the minutes from both the March 2024 and April 2024 meetings. ## Variance Request by Jeromie R. Kirk [timestamp: 01:00] The board reviewed variance request PLN-BOA-24-00012 submitted by Jeromie R. Kirk. The request sought approval to increase the allowable width of a driveway from the standard 10 feet to 20 feet. Chris Warner served as the key speaker presenting information about this variance request to the board members. The discussion centered on the specific dimensional requirements and the justification for exceeding the typical driveway width limitations established in the local zoning ordinance. Following the presentation and board discussion, the variance request was approved, allowing Kirk to proceed with constructing a 20-foot-wide driveway rather than being restricted to the standard 10-foot width requirement. ## Variance Request by Barbara and Henry Hinkle [timestamp: 02:00] The board reviewed variance request PLN-BOA-24-00063 submitted by Barbara and Henry Hinkle. The request sought to reduce the required side street side yard setback for an accessory structure on their property. Thomas Wilmes served as the key speaker presenting information about the variance request to the board members. The discussion focused on the specific setback reduction needed for the proposed accessory structure and whether the request met the criteria for granting a variance. Following the presentation and board discussion, the variance request was approved, allowing the Hinkles to proceed with their accessory structure project with the reduced setback requirements. ## Variance Request by Jessica Sucik and Tara Stanfield [timestamp: 03:00] The Board of Appeals reviewed case PLN-BOA-24-00071, a variance request submitted by Jessica Sucik and Tara Stanfield to reduce the required side yard setback from 8 feet to 5 feet. Brandee Smith presented the case to the board, outlining the details of the variance request. The applicants sought relief from the standard setback requirements to accommodate their proposed development plans. The board discussed the merits of the request, evaluating whether the variance met the necessary criteria for approval. The 3-foot reduction in the side yard setback requirement would allow the applicants to proceed with their project while maintaining adequate spacing from adjacent properties. Following their review and discussion of the application materials, the board voted to approve the variance request. The approval allows Jessica Sucik and Tara Stanfield to proceed with their project using the reduced 5-foot side yard setback instead of the standard 8-foot requirement. ## Variance Request by Lopez Construction The Board of Adjustment reviewed case PLN-BOA-24-00074, a variance request submitted by Lopez Construction [timestamp: 04:00]. The application sought multiple variances including modifications to rear yard setback requirements and driveway width standards. Mark Arnold served as the key speaker presenting details of the variance request to the board. The discussion centered on the specific variances being sought, which involved deviations from standard zoning requirements for both the rear yard setback dimensions and the proposed driveway width specifications. The board evaluated the merits of the variance application, considering the specific circumstances of the property and whether the requested modifications met the criteria for approval under local zoning ordinances. The discussion examined how the proposed variances would impact the overall development plan and surrounding properties. Following their review and deliberation of the case details, the Board of Adjustment voted to approve the variance request. The approval allows Lopez Construction to proceed with their project under the modified setback and driveway width requirements as specified in the variance application. The successful outcome of PLN-BOA-24-00074 provides Lopez Construction with the necessary zoning relief to move forward with their development plans while maintaining compliance with adjusted standards approved by the board. ## Conditional Use Permit for Poppys Flower Bar [timestamp: 05:00] The board reviewed application PLN-BOA-24-00064, a conditional use permit request for Poppys Flower Bar to establish a cocktail lounge with reduced setback requirements. Shelby White served as the key speaker presenting the application to the board. The request involved two primary components: authorization to operate a cocktail lounge at the proposed location and approval for a variance to reduce the standard setback requirements that would typically apply to this type of establishment. The board discussed the merits of the application, examining how the proposed cocktail lounge would fit within the existing zoning framework and neighborhood context. The setback reduction request required particular consideration, as it represented a deviation from standard zoning requirements. Following their review and discussion of the application materials, the board voted to approve the conditional use permit for Poppys Flower Bar. The approval allows the establishment to move forward with plans to operate as a cocktail lounge while maintaining the reduced setback that was requested as part of the application. The approval of PLN-BOA-24-00064 enables Poppys Flower Bar to proceed with their business plans under the conditions established through the conditional use permit process. ## Variance Request by Demarcus Lewis [timestamp: 06:00] The board considered case PLN-BOA-24-00067, a variance request submitted by Demarcus Lewis. The request involved multiple variances, including one specifically related to accessory structure height requirements. Lewis presented his case to the board, seeking relief from existing zoning regulations that would otherwise prevent his proposed development or modifications. The specific details of the variances requested were not fully detailed in the available materials, though the accessory structure height variance was identified as a key component of the application. During the discussion, board members evaluated the merits of Lewis's request against the standard criteria for granting variances, which typically include considerations of hardship, practical difficulties, and whether the variance would be contrary to the public interest or undermine the intent of the zoning ordinance. After deliberation, the board voted to deny the variance request. The specific reasons for the denial were not detailed in the available summary materials, but the decision indicates that the board determined Lewis's application did not meet the necessary standards for approval under the applicable variance criteria. The denial means that Lewis will not be permitted to proceed with his proposed project as originally planned and would need to either modify his plans to comply with existing zoning requirements or potentially appeal the board's decision through appropriate legal channels. ## Variance Request by Leona Greer Estate [timestamp: 07:00] The Board of Adjustment reviewed case PLN-BOA-24-00075, a variance request submitted by the Leona Greer Estate. The application sought multiple variances, including a side yard setback variance for the property. Darren Taylor served as the key speaker presenting information about the variance request to the board. The discussion centered on the specific variances being requested and their compliance with local zoning requirements. Following the presentation and board discussion, the variance request was approved. The approval allows the Leona Greer Estate to proceed with their proposed development plans that required relief from standard setback requirements and other zoning provisions. The case represents one of several variance requests considered during the meeting, with the board finding that the application met the necessary criteria for approval under the local zoning ordinance. ## Variance Request by Booker Group Investments LLC [timestamp: 08:00] The board reviewed agenda item PLN-BOA-24-00076, a variance request submitted by Booker Group Investments LLC. Harvey Booker served as the key speaker representing the applicant during the discussion. The request involved multiple variances, including a front yard setback variance, though the specific details of all requested variances were not fully detailed in the available materials. The application required board consideration due to deviations from standard zoning requirements that would affect the proposed development. During the presentation and subsequent discussion, the board determined that additional review was necessary before making a decision on the variance request. The specific concerns or issues that prompted the need for further review were not detailed in the available information. Following deliberation, the board voted to postpone the matter rather than approve or deny the application at this meeting. This postponement allows for additional time to review the application materials, address any outstanding questions, or gather additional information needed to make an informed decision. The postponement means Booker Group Investments LLC will need to return to a future board meeting for final consideration of their variance request. No timeline was specified for when the item would return to the agenda for final action. ## Conditional Use Permit for Armenteros Property Group LLC [timestamp: 09:00] The board considered agenda item PLN-BOA-24-00065, a conditional use permit application submitted by Armenteros Property Group LLC for an un-hosted short-term rental operation. Carlos Armenteros presented the request to the board on behalf of the applicant company. The specific details of the proposed short-term rental, including location and operational parameters, were discussed during the meeting. The application generated discussion among board members, though the specific concerns raised during deliberations are not detailed in the available meeting materials. The request required board approval to move forward with the proposed un-hosted short-term rental use. When the matter came to a vote, the board was unable to reach a majority decision. The vote resulted in a tie, which under standard parliamentary procedure means the motion failed to pass. As a result, the conditional use permit application PLN-BOA-24-00065 for Armenteros Property Group LLC was denied. This denial means the applicant cannot proceed with the proposed un-hosted short-term rental operation under the current application. The applicant would need to submit a new application or appeal the decision through appropriate channels if they wish to pursue the project further. ## Conditional Use Permit for Purple Door Management LLC [timestamp: 10:00] The board reviewed application PLN-BOA-24-00070, a conditional use permit request submitted by Purple Door Management LLC for an un-hosted short-term rental operation. Nicholas Huntin served as the key speaker presenting information about the application during the discussion. The request centered on obtaining the necessary permits to operate a short-term rental property without on-site hosting, meaning guests would have access to the property without the owner or manager being present during their stay. The board examined the details of Purple Door Management LLC's proposal, reviewing the specific requirements and conditions that would need to be met for this type of rental operation. Un-hosted short-term rentals typically require additional oversight and compliance measures compared to hosted arrangements, as they involve guests having independent access to residential properties. Following their review and discussion of the application materials, the board moved to approve the conditional use permit for Purple Door Management LLC. The approval allows the company to proceed with their un-hosted short-term rental operations, subject to meeting all applicable conditions and requirements outlined in the permit. The decision represents the board's determination that the proposed use meets the necessary criteria for approval and is compatible with local zoning and land use regulations governing short-term rental activities in the jurisdiction. ## Conditional Use Permit for Blake Hendricks [timestamp: 11:00] The board reviewed application PLN-BOA-24-00072, a conditional use permit request submitted by Blake Hendricks for an un-hosted short-term rental property. Blake Hendricks presented the application to the board, requesting approval to operate a short-term rental without on-site hosting. The specific details of the property location, rental terms, and operational parameters were discussed during the presentation. The board evaluated the request according to applicable zoning regulations and conditional use permit criteria for short-term rental operations. The un-hosted nature of the proposed rental was a key consideration in the review process. Following discussion of the application details and any relevant concerns, the board voted to approve the conditional use permit for Blake Hendricks' un-hosted short-term rental request. **Outcome:** Approved ## Conditional Use Permit for Leitha Pash-Lewis [timestamp: 12:00] The board considered agenda item PLN-BOA-24-00069, a conditional use permit application submitted by Leitha Pash-Lewis for an un-hosted short-term rental property. Leitha Pash-Lewis presented her request to the board, seeking approval to operate a short-term rental without on-site hosting. The specific details of the property location, proposed rental operations, and any supporting documentation were discussed during the presentation. Following the applicant's presentation and board discussion, the conditional use permit application was put to a vote. The vote resulted in a tie, which under board procedures constitutes a failure to approve the application. **Outcome:** The conditional use permit for Leitha Pash-Lewis was denied due to the tie vote. The application for the un-hosted short-term rental did not receive the necessary approval to move forward. ## Conditional Use Permit for Christian Perry [timestamp: 13:00] The Board of Adjustment reviewed application PLN-BOA-24-00077, a conditional use permit request submitted by Christian Perry for an un-hosted short-term rental property. Christian Perry presented his application to the board, seeking approval to operate a short-term rental without on-site hosting. The specific details of the property location, proposed rental operations, and any conditions discussed during the meeting were not detailed in the available materials. The board conducted their review of Perry's conditional use permit application according to standard procedures for short-term rental requests. The discussion covered the typical considerations for such applications, including compliance with zoning requirements and operational standards for un-hosted rental properties. Following their deliberation, the Board of Adjustment approved Christian Perry's conditional use permit request for the un-hosted short-term rental operation. The approval allows Perry to proceed with his proposed short-term rental business under the terms and conditions established by the permit. The successful outcome of PLN-BOA-24-00077 represents another conditional use permit granted by the board for short-term rental operations in the jurisdiction. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (6-0): Approval of March 2024 and April 2024 Board of Adjustment meeting minutes - **PLN-BOA-24-00012** — passed (6-0): Variance request by Jeromie R. Kirk to increase driveway width from 10' to 20' - **PLN-BOA-24-00063** — passed (6-0): Variance request by Barbara and Henry Hinkle to reduce side street side yard setback - **PLN-BOA-24-00071** — passed (6-0): Variance request by Jessica Sucik and Tara Stanfield to reduce side yard setback - **PLN-BOA-24-00074** — passed (6-0): Variance request by Lopez Construction for multiple variances including driveway width - **PLN-BOA-24-00064** — passed (6-0): Conditional use permit for Poppys Flower Bar to establish a cocktail lounge - **PLN-BOA-24-00067** — failed (0-6): Variance request by Demarcus Lewis for multiple variances including accessory structure height - **PLN-BOA-24-00075** — passed (5-0): Variance request by Leona Greer Estate for multiple variances including side yard setback - **PLN-BOA-24-00076** — postponed (6-0): Variance request by Booker Group Investments LLC for multiple variances including front yard setback - **PLN-BOA-24-00065** — failed (3-3): Conditional use permit for Armenteros Property Group LLC for un-hosted short-term rental - **PLN-BOA-24-00070** — passed (6-0): Conditional use permit for Purple Door Management LLC for un-hosted short-term rental - **PLN-BOA-24-00072** — passed (4-2): Conditional use permit for Blake Hendricks for un-hosted short-term rental - **PLN-BOA-24-00069** — failed (3-3): Conditional use permit for Leitha Pash-Lewis for un-hosted short-term rental - **PLN-BOA-24-00077** — passed (4-2): Conditional use permit for Christian Perry for un-hosted short-term rental --- ## Full transcript We were gracious enough to spend about an hour with us and tell us all kinds of stories about the show. We absolutely loved it, and I was a big kid when you did it. It was obviously an experience for me. But Gary's probably got a couple of questions for you from the motor perspective. All right, Gary, let me put on my hat before you ask me. Oh, outstanding. You still have it. Well, first of all, thank you for being here, and it's good to see you again. We had a good time when you were here last time. um it's like uh towery said just a few questions for you you mentioned that you rode before um before the show and that you went through police motorcycle training was there any differences in what you knew before you went through training compared to after you went through training you think your riding changed a lot yeah it really changed a lot you know most of the stuff that i knew before were problem areas that get in the way in terms of police training. But, you know, for example, just your head placement in terms of what you look at and where you're looking at things that you don't want to be looking at because you're going to hit them. You know, they always say, don't look at the rock in the middle of the road because you're going to hit it now, right? Which sure enough, you do, right? And, you know, then turning, you know, it's always looking about what people forget is that police bikes very heavy number one and it's a lot of you know the difficulty is all the slow riding the inertia and the balancing of the bike when you're just braking and clutching and barely moving through traffic and trying to balance it in kind of weird areas so you know we got really good at that and doing figure eights in a small rectangle without laying the bike down is always an issue. And that's why I always say that, you know, anyone can ride a motorcycle fast, but not many can ride it really, really slow. And that's why the motorcycle rodeos for cops, I think are really interesting to watch the balancing and clutching and braking that comes second nature to them. But even then, you can see them having a problem depending on the bike, with the balance set up on the bike because a BMW, a Kawasaki, a Harley, whatever, they all are different. And you have to ride them different. And most of the competitive riders I talk to talk about, you know, how to place your balance and what your body's type is, you know, long legs, short torso, long torso, short legs, and, you know, different body types have a different effect on the motorcycle. I think that, you know, one of the problems with a motorcycle is you have a false sense of talent. And it'll humble you and embarrass you. So, you know, high-speed braking was another issue. You know, I didn't know anything about that. And so my braking was usually just the rear brake. um chp trained different where you use both brakes uh and and easily use them so uh you know i probably laid the bike down multiple times and even with my children i had all my boys had dirt bikes and stuff and so we would go out by the barn we had a horse barn also and we go up there and behind the barn and ride the bikes and i would teach them how to lay down the bike so they would wreck the bike before they could ride the bike you know two things you know how to use the brakes and you got to wreck it so we did that a lot and the CHP did that it was a little intimidating at first because you know you think that big bike's coming down on your legs and ankles and all that but you have those bars on the side that it falls on so that spares you a little bit yeah without gloves and you know some pads and stuff it can bruise you up a little bit but it's Once you learn how to do it, it's not a big deal. And then, so braking was one issue, high-speed braking in terms of where the rear end comes around and says hello to you. The motorcycle, I'm exaggerating to make my point, but it does come around. And, you know, that's pretty intimidating. But once you learn how to do it, you know, look pretty cool when you come in hot and that happens. It's not a big deal, right? And then also, you know, being quiet and logical instead of emotional so that you can process information on a motorcycle because you have multiple other factors going on. When we thought of the motor unit episode a couple months ago, there was no option. I had to reach out and see if you would do it. So thank you so much for doing that. Yeah. We always tease. It's just a joke. so I hope no one takes offense to it. But I always tease the CHP guys here that, you know, we were in motors, the varsity. What are you guys, the junior varsity? That's great. That's great. Well, thank you again from the Lexington Police Department, from the motor unit, from everybody here at Your Lex PD. We want to thank you for joining us today. And thank you for your commitment to law enforcement and your support for law enforcement across the country. and certainly your support for the Lexington Police Department. So we had a great episode talking about motorcycle safety awareness. So interviewing Larry Wilcox and Sergeant Gary Thurman with the motor unit. So, Bodge, what are we talking about next month? All right, so so far we've done every episode from the ground. Next month let's do it at 1,000 feet. Oh, boy. I got to come into your world. We did it right along with patrols. So next month you come to my world. We're going to go do air support unit. Awesome. And we'll let you go up with us, actually do a plow along with us, and we'll look at some of our mission equipment and some of the purposes for the air support unit here in Lexington. Awesome. So join us next month by Genico with your Lex PD. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It'll be so lonely you could die Oh, although it's always crowded You still can find some room for broken hearted lovers to cry. It's so lonely, it's so lonely, they could die. They could die. I feel good. I knew that I wouldn't I feel good I knew that I wouldn't So good So good I got a year I feel nice I feel nice I feel nice My sugar is fine So nice, so nice I got you When I hold you in my arm I know that I can't do no wrong And when I hold you in my arm My love won't do you no harm And I feel nice That sugar is fine I feel nice That sugar is fine So nice So nice I got you I'm going to go. Sugar inspired So nice, so nice But I got a year Wow, I feel good I knew that I would now I feel good I knew that I would So good, so good But I got a year So good, so good, but I got a year So good, so good, but I got a year Hey! Thank you. It's under the weather or not under the weather has, was not able to make it. And our vice chair is not feeling a hundred percent. So I have the privilege of being the chair today. So it's been a while. So I will be maybe rusty. So, and they've changed a lot of things since I last chaired. first thing if you have your cell phones please silence those this is broadcast and taped so if you want to have conversations please take those out to the hallway i don't think we'll fill up today but you're not supposed to stand you're supposed to be seated by the fire marshal so if you guys could do that the first thing we're going to do is minutes for march and april 2024. Donna has circulated those. Has everyone had a chance to review them? And if so, I'll take a motion or do you have any clarifications? I'll make a motion to approve the meetings from March 2024. Are we doing April as well or does that have to be separate? I think you can do them both. Okay. And April 2024 from the Board of Adjustment Meetings. Second? Second. Mr. Clark is seconded. Please register your votes. All right. Thank you very much. next item i'm going to go through is some postponements we have a couple in which the applicant has requested postponement the first one is on page four item d1 plm boa 24-36 dustin and lauren gage they want to postpone till the july 8th 2024 meeting so this one is on 875 south cleveland road if you're here to speak on that they've asked for a one month postponement until July. Is there anyone here? Okay. Any questions from the members? And if not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I recommend postponement of PLNBOA 36, Dustin Lerner and Gage, until the July meeting on on what's that date? 8th. July 8th, sorry. July 8th, so move. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Did you hit the button first? Yeah. It's like a game show. You got to hit the button, not just yell it out. So we have a first and a second. If we could please register your votes. Okay. The staff has also informed us that the applicant for PLN VOA 2439, Lexington Islamic Center, Inc.'s application regarding 1240 Armstrong Mill. They have also requested a postponement until July 8th. If you recall, this is not the first postponement they've requested as they work through issues with staff. Is there anyone here in attendance regarding the Armstrong Mill property? All right, not seeing any. Unless you want to discuss, I am ready for a motion. I'd like to make a motion that we postpone PLNBOA 24-39 Lexington Islamic Center, request and conditional use permit postponed until the July meeting. Thank you, sir. Ms. Plumlee has seconded. Unless there's discussion, please register your vote. Okay. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to postpone or withdraw their applications in the applicant? okay hearing none what i'll do next is i will swear in the witnesses so those of you who have signed up out in the hallway if you want to speak you need to register in the hallway and then to right now i'll need you to stand and raise your right hand so i can swear you in thank you do you uh swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth Thank you very much. Now I'll go through the agenda and what we've been doing is we've been putting the short term rentals at the end to allow the staff an opportunity. I would just tell you by order of the agenda today, they all happen to be at the end. So there's no need to reorder anything. Perfect. All right. um... i'm gonna go through each case and if you are here as the applicant i would ask that you just raise your hand let me know your president and if you're here to speak on behalf or against i'm application i would also ask you to uh... razor he would not call are there in then also if you are an attorney who's representing either the applicant or the public if you could stand uh... when i ask in that way we have an idea of council in the room and who's represented by various parties. So the first case I'm gonna call is through the variance appeals. Number one is PLN BOA 24-12 Jeremy R. Kirk regarding 612 North Broadway. Is Mr. Kirk present? Thanks. Okay, so we have representative for the applicant. Is anyone here to speak on this particular case? I don't see anyone on registered. So you will be the first item to come up in a minute. The next case is C2 on page one, which is PLN VOA 2463, Barbara and Henry Hinkle, regarding 141 South Hanover Avenue. The Hinkles are the representative present today. Thank you, sir. Anyone who wants to speak on that matter, which is 63 yes i have one person mr wilms oh okay perfect then you will your case will not be heard and we'll have you come up um on the second case i'm now on page two item three plm boa 2467 demarcus lewis this is regarding two three seven six liberty road is mr lewis or representative in attendance thank you sir um go see here i have one nope okay there we go there's no one else on the list is anyone here to speak on behalf of this oh what's that does look like there are a few other people that did log in oh okay wait well it doesn't matter um Sir, yes. This one's been recommended for duece approval, so in either case it will be heard. It will be the first item to actually be heard today. After we go through the ones that have been recommended for approval in which there's no opposition. So you will be the heard case number one. the next item is PLM VOA 2471 Jessica Susick and Tara Stanfield are they here are the representative okay and then this is for four seven five long view drive and apologize people I keep flipping back and forth because this is a new system. Is there anyone here who wants to speak on this application? Okay. So you will be the third on the, what I'm going to call the abbreviated agenda. The next case is item five on page two, PLM BOA 2474, Lopez Construction, regarding property at 1319 North Limestone. This has been recommended for approval. And is the applicant or the representative here thank you sir anyone here who plans on speaking on this one okay so you will be the fourth on the abbreviated unless somebody surfaces i'm now on page three item number six plmboa 2475 leona greer estate regarding 522 to Marino Street. Is the applicant or a representative here? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone here who wants to speak on this issue? Okay, sorry about that, I was looking at the things. So this one will be heard, and I've got this as heard number two. The next item is number seven on page three PLN 2476 Booker Group Investments LLC regarding 348 Camp C Court. The staff has recommended approval. Is the applicant present today? Thank you, sir. Is anyone here who wants to speak? All right, we've got some. So this one will be herd number three. I'm on page four. D1 and D2 have been postponed. So I'm now on number three, which is PLN BOA 2464, Poppy's Flower Bar, located at 210 Old Mount Tabor Road. And we've got approvals by the staff. Is the applicant present? Thank you, ma'am. Is there anyone here to speak on this case? All right, so then I will have you be abbreviated number five. And how strong are these drinks? Since they're poppy's flower, I was just curious how strong they were. And then that brings us to our short-term rental agenda items. And we are going to be on page five. This is item number four, PLM BOA 2465, Arminenteros, I butchered that one, Property Group LLC regarding 639 CISO Way. Is the applicant present? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone who wants to speak on behalf of the CISO Way project? Okay. So I'm going to have you, you'll be on the abbreviated once we get to the short-term rentals. So you'll be the first one. The next item is number five, PLNBOA 2469, Letha Pash Lewis, regarding 253 Hillendale Road. Is the applicant present? Thank you, ma'am. And do we have anyone here to speak on this case? So we have several. Okay. So this one will be the first case to be heard. The next item is on page six, item number six, PLM VOA 2470 Purple Door Management LLC regarding 102 Glass Avenue. is the applicant here thank you and is there anyone here to speak on this case this is uh 102 glass avenue okay i've got you then on the second abbreviated short-term rental the next one is number seven on page six plmboa 2472 blake hendrix related to 3532 Camelot Drive. Is the applicant present? Thank you. Is there anyone here who wants to speak on the Camelot Drive project? Okay. I will have you as number three on the abbreviated. Number eight on the same page, PLMBOA 2477, Christian Perry regarding 386 Bravington Way. Is the applicant present? Thank you. Is there anyone here who wants to speak on the 786 Bravington Way? Okay, so I'll have you be heard number two on the short-term rental. Is there anyone in the audience who wanted to speak on a case? And I may have missed it so I can pull it where we put it in the agenda. Please raise your hand. okay so with that being said what we'll do is we'll start going through the variance appeals which starts on page number one item one plnb away 24-12 Jeremy R Kirk regarding 612 North Broadway if the applicant could please come up to the podium for me Hello. Good afternoon, sir. If you could please give your name for the record. Chris Warner. And you are, how are you related to the applicant? I'm a contractor. Okay. You're the contractor and you are here on their behalf? Yes. The staff has recommended approval today. That approval is based on the three conditions. Are you and your client, have you seen those? Yes. We've reviewed them and we're okay with them. You agree with them? Yeah. being said um anyone here on this item no and you were sworn in uh no i was not okay please raise your hand and do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth or affirm yes and then the testimony you gave a few minutes ago that was all true yes thank you very much so with that being said i will now open the floor to any questions or comments from my fellow committee members so the the garage is already constructed is that correct yes and we have a building permit for that okay the only thing we're talking about here is the apron yes the driveway yes okay is there is there a dimension on that that you arrived at are you still negotiating with engineering we are so I've got a permit application in with building inspection and it came to you guys because it's going to be bigger than 10 feet his garage opening is 20 feet and we're going to come out straight from that and whatever building inspection will allow angle wise to come to the alley Any other questions? All right, I will entertain a motion if anyone's ready. Okay. Ms. Clumley has moved for approval of the request for a variance on PLNBOA 24-12 Jeremy Kirk regarding 612 North Broadway for a driveway from 10 feet to 20 feet within the infill development area. Is that correct? That is correct with the three conditions recommended by staff. Yes. Thank you, ma'am. Any second? Ms. Tucker has seconded. Any discussion? If not, please register your votes. Good luck with your project. Thank you. You're welcome. The next case on our abbreviated docket is PLMBOA 2463, Barbara Henry Hinkle regarding 141 South Hanover Avenue. I think we've had a few folks come into the room. We do still have several seats in the front up here if you'd like to sit down. We do need everyone to be in a seat. My name is Tom Williams, the architect of the project at 512 East Main Street. Oh, that's your address? That's right. Okay, perfect. I was like, that's the wrong address. You can't catch me to come see me. So this one, for those who came in late, this is 141 South Hanover Avenue. Is anyone here to speak on this application? All right, and you were sworn in, sir? I was. And the staff has recommended the approval of this application based upon the two conditions, and you're here on behalf of the owner, and you and the owner are okay with those? We are. Okay, thank you, sir. I will now turn it over to the committee if you have any questions, And if not, let me know if you want to make a motion. Mr. Chair, I move approval of PLNBOA 2463, Barbara and Henry Hinkle, request for a variance to reduce the side street yard setback for an accessory structure from 30 feet to 6 feet in a historic district overlay zone and mixed low-density residential zone, a property located at 141 South Hanover Avenue. based on the staff's recommendation and the two conditions as listed. So moved. Thank you, sir. And I need a second. Second. Mr. Walker has seconded. Anyone want to discuss this matter? Hearing none, let's put it to a vote. All right, approved. Good luck with your project. Thanks for your time. You're welcome. On item page two, item three is the 2376 Liberty Road. That one will be heard, so we will skip past that case. We will now move to item four, PLNBOA 2471, Jessica Susick and Tara Stanfield regarding their variance request for 575 Longview Drive. Hello, if you could state your name for the record. Brandy Smith, I'm the contractor. Okay, and then you were sworn in. Yes. Thank you very much. The staff has recommended approval of your application subject to the two conditions, and you and the owner are okay with those conditions? Yes, sir. Thank you very much. I will now turn it over to the board if you have any questions. I'd like to make a motion for approval for PLN BOA 24-71, request of variance to reduce the required side yard setback from 8 feet to 5 feet in order to construct an addition to a single family residential R1C zone on property located at 575 Longview Drive. Staff recommends approval based on two conditions. Thank you, sir. And Ms. Plumlee has seconded. Any discussion on this particular motion? I will then put it to a vote. Approved. Good luck with your project. Thank you. That takes me to PLN BOA 2474, which is item number five on page two. Lopez Construction has requested variances in relation to 1319 North Limestone. Applicant please come forward for me. Hello, Mark Arnold. Mr. Arnold, are you the owner or the contractor? I'm the designer representing the contractor. And the owner? No, no, no, just the designer representing the contractor. The contractor is the owner. Oh, okay. Perfect. The staff has recommended approval based upon four conditions, conditions and you and the parties have reviewed those? Yes, we have. You're in agreement? Yes. Okay. So, and you were sworn in? Yes, I was. Thank you. So, with that being said, I will open it up to any members of the committee who'd like to discuss this project, or if not, you may move for a motion. Mr. Chair, I move to approve PLN BOA 24-74 Lopez Construction's request first for a variance to reduce the required yard setback from 31 feet to 30. Second, a variance to reduce the required side yard from 8 feet to 5 feet. And third, a variance to increase the allowable driveway from 10 feet to 20 feet in order to construct an addition with an attached garage within the infill, defined infill redevelopment area in a single family residential zone on property located at 1319 North Limestone, based on staff recommendations and subject to the four conditions. Thank you, sir. And Ms. Tucker has seconded. If there's no discussion, then I'll put this to a vote. Approved. Good luck with your project. Thank you. Appreciate your time. The next two cases are PLNBOA 2475 regarding 522 Marino Street and PLNBOA 2476 regarding 348 KMSEE Court. Those will both be heard, so we'll be skipping those cases. So that makes us through the variances, and now we will move on to the conditional use appeals. The first one on the abbreviated docket is item three on page four, PLM VOA 2464, Poppy's Flower Bar regarding 210 Old Mount Tabor Road. The applicant, thank you, ma'am. Is there anyone here to speak on this one? All right. If you could state your name for the record. Shelby White. Thank you, Ms. White. And if you could, you were sworn in? Yes. And are you the owner? Yeah, the owner and the applicant. Well, not the owner of the building, the owner of the business. The business, yes. Perfect. The staff has recommended your conditional use and your variance. Is there anyone on the commission who would like to ask any questions of the applicant? Thank you. I have a question. Do you need a liquor license and do you have one? Through the process of obtaining it, but I had to do this before they would approve the license because the building wasn't zoned for alcohol. Thank you. Well, if there are no other questions, I will entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I recommend approval of PLNBOA 2464, Poppy's Flower Bar. requests conditional use permit to establish a cocktail lounge and a variance to reduce the required setback between a cocktail lounge and a resident residential zone from 100 feet to zero feet in a neighborhood business zone on property located at 210 old Mount Tabor Road based on the staff's recommendation and the the four conditions that is listed. Thank You Mr. Clark. Mr. Walker has seconded the motion. Does anyone have any comments before we vote? Seeing none, then I'll call the vote. The application has been approved. Good luck with your new business. You're welcome. Okay, now we are going into, actually, let me flip back. I can't recall. Does she do? Do we go through the short terms or do we have the one heard for the variants first? How have we been doing it? Last time we did that we would hear the one for the variants next and then do all the short terms together. That was my recollection. I just wanted to make sure. Perfect. Okay, so that being said, I am now going to bring up the case of PLNBOA 2467 DeMarcus Lewis. This is regarding 2376 Liberty Road. Since the staff has recommended disapproval, the staff will go first. Then I will allow the applicant to come up and explain their project and why it should be approved. And thereafter, any public comment will be heard. and then the board will then ask questions and or vote. So thank you very much, Autumn. You may proceed. Right. Good afternoon. This is an application for four variances related to two accessory structures that have been constructed on a property. This includes a variance to reduce the required side street side yard setback from 30 feet to 23 feet, a variance to increase the maximum height of that accessory structure from 14 feet to 18 feet, a variance to increase the total allowable size of all buildings' accessory to the dwelling unit from 841 square feet to 3,135 square feet, and a variance to increase the allowable lot coverage or building footprint for accessory buildings from 1,682 square feet to 3,135 square feet in order to allow some existing recently constructed structures to remain. So taking a look at sort of the area, the project is located on Liberty Road at the corner of Liberty and Woodward. So I'm the little blue guy right there. The immediate area includes a variety of residential zoning, primarily R1B, R1D, and R1E, as well as some agricultural urban AU zoning. And land uses are primarily detached single-family dwelling units. So zooming into the subject property, you can see here at the corner, it's approximately .6 acres and contains a one-story single-family dwelling and five accessory structures. There's also an existing non-conforming gravel parking area on the property that has existed for quite some time and is not included in this appeal. So but kind of taking a look at the property, this is the single-family structure. The two accessory structures that the variances are addressing are this structure here with the kind of white roof and this one here. The L-shaped structure and the one closest to the large one here, those were permitted historically. And then there's a very small shed that would have not required a permit sort of sandwiched in there at the edge of the property. So this section just discusses the zoning ordinance requirements for accessory structures. Accessory structures are regulated in terms of both overall square footage as well as lot coverage and the ordinance requires that the total amount of accessory structures be limited to a maximum of 50% of the square footage of the principal structure on the property. Additionally, the lot coverage or the footprint of the building can't exceed the lot coverage of the principal structure. So since the applicant purchased the property in September of 2020, he has constructed two large metal buildings and the small metal shed. The two metal buildings did not receive building permits, but should have, and a permit would not have been required for the smaller metal shed structure. There are two existing structures that I pointed out previously that were permitted historically. They already exceeded the 50% in the lot coverage for this particular property, but they are legally nonconforming based on the permitting history that we were able to find. So the addition of the two metal buildings and the metal shed have significantly increased the nonconformity of both the footprint and the total size of accessory structures. Kind of zooming in on the site plan here. The existing single family home has a building footprint of 1,682 square feet. And it is a one story structure with no other finished spaces. So the total size of the structure in floor area is also 1,682 square feet. between the five accessory structures, the total proposed accessory square footage and lot coverage is 3,135 square feet. The non-conforming block building and garage already represented 63%, so exceeding what they were allowed to by 13%. The applicant is now requesting an increase to allow for 186% of the principal structure to be allowed in order for all of these accessory structures to remain. Additionally, the structure closest to Woodward Lane, this one back here, is 18 feet tall, which exceeds the allowable height for an accessory structure by 4 feet. So accessory structures are not permitted to be any taller than the principal structure and the dwelling unit is right at about 14 feet in height. The applicant did not provide significant information regarding the need for the accessory structures or a justification for the variance requests. In his application, he'll find that he was on a corner lot and that that was a special circumstance and that there were no impacts or safety concerns related to the structures. We are aware that the applicant operates a nonprofit youth volleyball organization and we understand that his children and their friends play volleyball in at least one of these structures. They received a zoning compliance permit for a home office for that organization earlier this year. So here are just a few photos of the subject property. These were made by inspectors from the Division of Building Inspection. That's how this case got to us. There were complaints regarding the construction of these two large structures. So this is the one that is sort of on plan left when you're looking at the site plan. And then again that same structure and showing how close it is to the block building that was permitted. It's quite close there. And then the photo on the right-hand side, you can see the height difference between the accessory structure and the principal structure. This structure that you see in these photos is located to the right of the front of the house. This is the other structure that is the subject of this appeal. So our staff is recommending disapproval of the application. The applicant has not provided a sufficient justification statement to meet the requirements of Article 7 of the Zoning Ordinance or KRS 100. There do not appear to be special circumstances that are unique to the property that don't apply to land in the general vicinity. While the fact that the lot is on a corner lot, it does result in a deeper setback requirement from the side street, but corner lots are not unique in our community and the applicant has not provided details related to the need for the accessory structures that exceed the allowable size, lot coverage, and height. So we are recommending disapproval today. Thank you, ma'am. And real quickly, we're looking at the site plan. Realistically, it's the two metal buildings that are the current issue. The other three older buildings will be allowed as non-conforming? Correct. Okay. Even though those affect the overall square footage that they're requesting, it's really these two that are the issue. Right. The ones labeled as block and vinyl are legally non-conforming. They were permitted. The shed does increase the non-conformity but would not have required a permit because of its small size, so we're not as concerned with that. Technically, it shouldn't have been added, but the bigger issue is the two large metal buildings. Thank you. Does everyone understand any questions for the staff? All right, Mr. Lewis, please come forward. Good afternoon. Please say your name for the record. And you were sworn in earlier? Yes, sir. And at this point, the staff has recommended disapproval, and so this is your opportunity to explain your unique circumstances of why these two buildings should be permitted. First off, the one building not closer to what we're laying was built about three to four years ago. It did not have a permit at the time. It was partially done, but I ended up finishing it up from the previous one. this first one uh with the next one actually toward woodward lane uh if you all know um there is going to be an expansion of liberty road what that does is what liberty road does if you look at what we're laying i no longer have a driveway so my driveway would be on woodward lane so that was giving me access to be able to protect my vehicles as well as my rv that i'll be able to bring on my home to my property which that is the reason for the the height of the that particular building. If you all get with, I think it's Highway, I don't know which one it does the expansion. I just closed a deal where I basically gave them my deed, head for my deed from that property. So that expansion will start, I think, next year. So that no longer, I no longer have a driveway. So that allows me to have access for my vehicles. If you see where the building is, it would go into my driveway. So that is the purpose of that building, to allow me privacy as well as privacy from what we're laying, which is, you know, gets calls all the time for drug-infested areas to protect my belongings. Real quick, Mr. Lewis. On there, there should be a pointer, remote control looking thing. If you would, as you're talking about each building, if you could uh okay oh so which is this the building you're talking about yes yes sir yes sir so um i don't know how to get my drive but if you um but see i will no longer have access to my driveway so my driveway wanted to liberty road i no longer have that i would no longer have that anymore i'm the only drive i'm the only property that's why i was the first one that they actually issued funds to purchase because I'm the main one that's going to be disturbed more than anybody when that expansion goes up. Once they expand Liberty Road, I no longer have any driveway space. So now my driveway basically would be the most awkwardest thing ever would be accessing through Wilbur Lane, which again, Wilbur Lane is that's why we have the fence as we do. Wilbur Lane is definitely like an area where I wouldn't prefer like to have access to my home. So it allows me, I have expensive vehicles, it allows me to have that space as well as like again me to bring my RV onto the property to be able to get that for the height of it. And that expansion goes down I think next year. I mean I was the first one that they actually like just a month and a half ago actually purchase their deed. Mr. Lewis, what is the primary use of the metal buildings? The primary use will eventually, once they allow me to go in and out, it would be that use. That would be the use of, again, my vehicles. However, like there's been times when my kids have been in there playing just because, again, we're on Liberty Road. They don't have, you know, if you look at Liberty Road and look at my house, like I I can't put them in the front yard based off of the fact that like they could run in the road. Now if we go to neighbors who complain and has complained about it and oh he's doing this he's doing it. Here's the thing I have a nonprofit organization I also have a contract with the county public schools and I have numerous amounts of gyms in the in the community right now. We have LTMS, we have Brian Station as well that we utilize those facilities for things like that. Do we have any questions from any of them? Mr. Lewis, let me ask you this. Yes, sir. When did you learn that these buildings were not in code? I didn't learn until probably October or September that that was the case. I'm going to be honest, this is my first purchase of a home ever coming from the projects. This is my dream, the home ownership. I purchased this home specifically because it was in an area where I drove around and seen that there was other things done and they didn't have an HOA or anything like that. That was why I purchased this home. I never knew that I had to have them. And then when they came to me and told me about it, I went ahead and tried to take care of everything I needed to take care of. I actually went and got a loan to be able to get the survey and paid $1,400 for that. Engineer, paid another $1,000 for that. So I was kind of to comply with. And building inspection, I try to comply with every single thing that they asked me to do once I found out what I needed to do. Again, I'm one that does things in the community and not take away from the community. So were you given any options of what your next step might be? No, my option was to make sure that I got the permit, make sure I got my survey and site plan and all that stuff together so that I could be able to present it to you all, I guess. All right. Thank you, sir. Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am. Linda. So you talked about the one metal structure. So the other metal structure on the other side of the home, that's a garage, correct? No, I just use it as a gym. Okay, the one with the glass door that comes down? Okay. I don't know, you just got a lot of buildings on this property. You have a lot of buildings on this property. Yeah, and like I said, I had those two buildings and like I said, the other building was built soon as a personal and then this last building was only built because once they presented that option to me as far as me not having the driveway i wanted to make sure that i had somewhere to put my vehicles which is probably the it's it's an awkward thing that they're probably putting me into as far as uh driving on woodward lane or open it up so me only having to drive we only will be like need additional questions thank you sir if you want to see the first row uh... we have i believe some people from the audience wants to come this one Yeah, come on up to the podium if you want to speak. Yeah. Good afternoon. What's that? Against. Oh, yes. Would you state your name? My name is Katie McCormick. I live at 737 Woodward Lane, which is the property directly behind Mr. DeMarcus. Okay. You will have three minutes to state why you're opposed to this application. Mr. DeMarcus is running a volleyball training club out of that building currently. When he first moved in, he stated that he bought theirs because other people had ran him off where he wanted to do what he wanted to do in their neighborhoods. So I'm against it because Mr. DeMarcus would have had a driveway off of Woodward Lane had he not built that building where the state told him he was going to have to move his driveway to, for off of Woodward Lane. The noise that I hear on my property from that property is loud music while he's doing private training sessions with people in the smaller building, okay? That's to the right, the smaller metal building. He's doing training sessions with people in there. The volleyball club is called the Lexington High Riser Volleyball Club. And he has the noise hits the back end with the volleyballs and I can hear it in my home with my dog barking. The television turned up loud because I have a hearing impairment without my hearing aids in and I can hear the balls bouncing off the back of that wall. In that area, let's see, where the ladder is at, he has already put a gravel parking area in that area for his customers and clients to park in. There has already been issues on Woodward Lane with his customers and clients having parked outside the fence on Woodward Lane. Okay, I even had one that parked on the apron of my driveway. Woodward Lane is a private road. It has been there for over 70 years. I have lived in my home over 60 years. My parents lived in it. I got it, and I've been living in it for the last 10 years. Okay, Mr. DeMarcus just feels like, I think, is not a good neighbor because he thinks he can do whatever he wants to do on that property. And him saying that he didn't know until September or October that he could not put those buildings up, if he had checked into the zoning of his property and ran the zoning laws, he would have known that he could not put those buildings up. he would have known there are building codes for the city of Lexington where you have to get permits to do anything like this. Thank you, Ms. McCormick. Thank you. Before you leave, any questions for Ms. McCormick? Okay, thank you, ma'am. Thank you. I will give Mr. Lewis an opportunity to respond. Oh, we have another one? Oh, sorry. Come on up. Good afternoon. My name is Charles Logan. I live on the corner pass, Mr. Lewis. If you're coming from New Circle, I live, he lives here, and I live here going toward Hamburg. What's your address? 2416 Liberty Road. I live right there. And when I moved in the property that I have, it was October 2nd, 2002. It was a peaceful, tranquil neighborhood. That's why I moved there. It's kind of like moving into the country and the city. So there's been increased traffic. We don't have a turn signal or turn lane on Liberty Road. So if people are turning into him or turning opposite, it causes a backup of traffic. People turning in Woodward Lane, if they park on Woodward Lane, causes traffic jam. It has become noisier since I've lived there and this has happened. There's more traffic parking outside of the fence on Woodward Lane. Woodward Lane is a private lane for the people that live there. There has been issues where, can we switch the pointer? Yeah, there's the remote. How do you put the other one where it shows that? There we go. My property is to the far left where the length, I have put rocks next to it because he's had contractors come over and they've always ran into the yard. We found out later that he owns it section, but I, with my labor, my dirt, would always have to repair whatever was done. I mow it or whatever. But we found out through this highway plan that he owns part of it. So I have rocks probably 14 to 16 feet from there as the road. On numerous occasions, trucks have been there backing up into the dirt, deep tracks and left, and I would fix it. There's issues with the parking on Woodward Lane. people have two wheel vehicles, I mean dual vehicles like that cut grass, have trailers or whatever. So if you parked on the side, it impedes them from coming back and forth, getting to their home. So there's issues that have changed since this happened. I usually go to work about 7.30. From 6 o'clock on, there's cars pulling in that shine across my yard to maybe 8 or 9 at night. The area has changed basically since this construction. I, being an African American, was one of the first people to welcome Mr. Lewis to the neighborhood, introduce him to people. Since then, it's what self got aggressive or whatever. Things have changed. But what I'm trying to state is my whole condition has changed with my enjoyment of my property since this took place. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Logan. Then there's one more speaker. All right, come on up. I wasn't going to speak, so I haven't been sworn in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, ma'am. If you could state your name for the record. Amber Bishop. Bishop? Please proceed. I wasn't going to say anything, but as I've been sitting here, I do want to say that when he purchased this building, we moved in together. I do not live there any longer, but as I was sitting here, I felt it was only right for me to get up here to say to you guys that since moving in there, the neighbor that made the complaints, the female that spoke one person before me, there's been issues since he moved into that home. I would like to say that I feel like these complaints are unrightfully motivated. I do not believe that the gentleman that spoke right before me had any issues with DeMarcus Lewis until there were complaints about this newfound issue with him owning some of his property. And that's when the dispute started. And that's probably when I could confirm that I noticed there was a change in the relationship there. He was very welcoming when we moved into that home. I can't say the same about the neighbor behind us when I did live there before the construction of any of these buildings. I would like to also state, and I do not like to pull the race card, but I do feel like there's racial, there's discrimination and other motives behind this. There's been issues since moving into this home with not agreeing with even purchasing this property and having a lot of questions. I would like to say that there's no illegal activity going on on the property. And I just want to say that I dispute what they are saying and disagree with all of the allegations that I heard up here this afternoon. Thank you, Ms. Bishop, for coming down. Let's see here. Mr. Sullivan? Arthur Sullivan? Come on up, Mr. Sullivan. You can state your name for the record. Arthur Sullivan. You were sworn in? Yes. Thank you, sir. Please, you've got three minutes. Yeah, I'd just like to say that I've been, I was in business for 44 years as an electrical contractor and construction. Any building built requires a permit. It requires an electrical inspection. And if it has water in it, it requires a plumbing inspection. So what I'm reading on your paper, this gentleman didn't have all the permits. So it's kind of a case closed. That it? Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. So Mr. Lewis, I'm going to allow you to come back up. It looks like there are two main issues. The first one, I'm just going to state that you could potentially be having a commercial enterprise in a residential zone that does not have the appropriate permit. But that's not before us today. what is before us is your buildings and you did not have a permit for them correct and so um and i will say this that we have made people tear off floors tear out driveways tear out other things because they didn't have a permit before they did it so this is your opportunity to address your neighbors concerns and then at that point it'll be up to us whether or not we order that building to come down. Like my fiance said, the thing is, the one in the back, probably since that building has been constructed since October and long before that, the complaints with her has been literally like overwhelming. When I say overwhelming, once a week, I mean, it would be zoning, it would be building it everything like to the point where like again as she said again nobody wants to ever pull a race card but like when you're saying racial slurs to my kids and things like that like you know based off of them playing music and dancing in the backyard like come on like the kids at the end I mean you all can listen to all the boy you want so at the end of the day I don't play about kids and you all should never play about kids when you're doing things like that it's a whole nother level. And that's where this came from. You can check downtown the records. I have over probably five to six different harassment complaints on her. Like just the same thing that I'm explaining right now. So we can talk about this and talk about that. But when that complaint, that's out the door. Because again, at this point, like she's been giving me crap since I've been there. How are you paying for this? This, that, and other. I mean, accuse me of selling drugs because there's no way that you can buy this home. Why? Because I'm blind. Why? Why should I not be able to afford it? And then, like she said, the other neighbor, up until this point, he was very welcome. We were like this, and he actually disliked the lady that came. But apparently, as soon as we did the, what is it, surveying, and I found out that I owned about five to ten feet into his yard, it became a problem. And then it was a team up. You know, so this is all came about just here recently based off of them, us found out about the highway stuff and so forth. You know, like other than that, I get it. You know, like I didn't have the permits. And like I said, I've been in compliance with them about doing everything that I need to do. Like I said, when he got a loan to be able to pay for the survey, to be able to pay for the engineer, the whole nine yards. like I didn't do it at first, but I've done my dual diligence as far as like trying to make it right. And that was all I was trying to do was make it right. And they said, hey, you know, we got to go to the Board of Justice and do it. Hey, whatever I got to do. So I've tried to make it right. And as far as like the volleyball players, I explained to you all, again, yes, I have five daughters, four of them of age and four of them play volleyball. And yes, you know, and they're allowed to play in their home. like and I'm allowed to have business and as far as like traffic and man first of all I don't have time for that like I'm a mobile trainer I have I train from five o'clock to seven seven o'clock and I'm traveling if you look up and say I was on the news wildcat mobile gym like I travel you know like I mean come on like I mean some of the complaints is just ludicrous I mean and it's like okay what we're gonna do just say whatever we want to say just to you know please everybody and say whatever you want to say, I mean, like, come on. I get it. We hear about the buildings, and again, that the smaller building wasn't even into play with Ms. Autumn until I guess we got the Board of Justice, because they said that that wasn't from the building, especially that's not even our issue. We don't, you know, we're not even worried about that. That was done three or four years ago from Mr. Robinson. And then all of a sudden, now that's a concern, you know, which, again, cool. I'm fine with that. whatever that has to be done. But that was only thing that I knew about was, like I said, the building and the reason for the building, again, was the expansion of the road to be able to get me parking, that's it. Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Do we have any questions? Oh, not, I'm not gonna have any more public comment. I was gonna ask any more questions for Mr. Lewis. Okay, if you could sit down. I'm going to close out. I'm sorry, I had a couple questions. So I went in that Woodward Lane when I went to look at it, and that is a very narrow lane. Yes, it is. Is there been any kind of traffic study done? And then my other concern, too, is with all the water runoff of those buildings? No complaints. First of all, as far as Woodward Lane, it is a very narrow road. It is and the crazy thing about it about the complaints. These are this is the same road that the lady before the other gentleman that she put she and her son parks their cars on is the same road that the gentleman disposed that his landscaping guy parks their cars on. So I mean like even though that's my property and that's my property you know what we're laying is is my all the way to the easement like there's a section right before my fence line where that's my parking if I want to use the parking. If I got something going on as far as, like, for instance, when we have family events, like, I park my cars right on there so that my family can get it parking into my house. I'm not doing nothing that nobody else in this room does when they have family members at their house. My question was more, have you had the city out to look at those issues concerning the amount of probably water runoff that you have here and the effect that you're generating? Yes, we've had it. I didn't know you was looking at them or what was going on. Well, sometimes they know. So that would likely occur during the building inspection process and the permitting process, which Mr. Lewis has not been completely through because he has to get a variance approved before building inspection will issue a permit and the building was not permitted in the first place. So those inspections have likely not been done. Mr. Robinson came on and asked for the engineering paperwork and he actually like seen everything as far as like, you know, the spacing and everything. And he said once all of this is squared away, there shouldn't be a problem. Any additional questions? Thank you. Mr. Lewis, you want to take a seat? Thank you. I just want to address a couple things. First off, just make sure everyone knows that this board, we try to rule without fear or favor. We try to be fair and we try to treat everyone equally. So I realize that sometimes neighbors may have disputes, people may have underlying issues amongst themselves, but those really have no place before us and we do not, even if If certain things are said that should not be said, we do not take those into account. With that being said, I have a real concern with this application in that there's been really no justification for a building of that size that exceeds our zoning limitations so greatly. To the extent that those same, to the extent they were justifications, could be applied to every single person in this room. We usually try to find things that are site specific and cannot be easily duplicated all over the city. So that's just my concern with this request. But at that point, I will open it up if any member wants to discuss or has any comments or has more questions. Yes, I'd like to comment for just a moment. And in first place, I think very positively Mr. Lewis' work with young people. I think that's something that we ought to identify and just give him credit for that. I think it's very, very important. And I think some of us have done the same thing. I think it's really important. Having said that, I think we've heard a number of complaints from neighbors. We've heard about parking and the driveway and noise and traffic and all those things. And I just want to say that these may be important to the neighbors, but at the same time, they have no bearing or little bearing on the issue here. Because the issue here is simply, are these buildings legal? And is it appropriate for those buildings to be on the property? And is it an appropriate decision by the staff to recommend disapproval? So if you're ready for a motion, Mr. Chair. I am. I would like to move for disapproval of PLN BOA 2467 by Mr. Lewis' request for, one, a variance to reduce the required side yard setback from 30 feet to 23 feet, Two, a variance to increase the maximum height of an accessory structure from 14 feet to 18 feet. And number three, a variance to increase the total allowable size of all buildings accessory to the dwelling unit from 841 square feet to 3,135 square feet. and four, a variance to increase the allowable lock coverage building footprint for accessory buildings from 1,682 square feet to 3,135 square feet in order to allow existing accessory structures to remain as constructed in a single-family residential zone on property located at 2376 Liberty Road, based on the staff's recommendation for this approval. And Mr. Bob has seconded. Any comments? Hearing none, then I will call a vote. So your application has been denied. You have an opportunity to appeal this to the circuit court, and you'll need to work with staff and building inspection on your steps forward. Thank you, sir. Pardon? I would suggest reaching out to Lauren in building inspection, and you'll be working with her moving forward with what your next steps are, unless you opt to file an appeal with circuit court, in which case we can't really help you with that. But it would need to be done within 30 days. Correct. No, you would not come back here. Yeah. Thank you. our next case to be heard is plmboa 24-75 leona career estate regarding variances for the property located at 522 marino street is the applicant present thank you sir come on up and then i have this remark there is there are people who would like to speak on this application if you could raise your hand thank you gentlemen so with that being said the staff has recommended approval So we'll let you describe your, you've been here before. So we'll let you describe the project and why the staff was correct in recommending approval. Yeah, first off, Darren Taylor with Gibson Taylor Thompson Architecture and Design. We represent the owner. As you'll, I don't think we have any documents up here, but this is a very narrow site in the former Davis Bottom neighborhood. Do I actually, we could pull up, they could pull up the site plan. That would be cheeky is the pointer. As you'll see, this is a very narrow site. This is an existing site in an older neighborhood in what was the Davis Bottom neighborhood. Ms. Greer, who's our client, inherited this property from her grandmother. Her desire is to construct a multi-unit, and by multi we mean up to four, but hopefully up to four, but she's willing to go to two or three if possible, so that she can be an owner-occupant of this site again. And the way that that would work for her is to be able to obviously occupy the site and then gain rent from any tenants. Obviously with this being such a narrow site, it presents a tricky set of conditions as far as constructing a building on this while seeing to the setbacks that are applied to this zone and actually constructing a building on this site. And we've worked on many narrow sites such as this before, but rarely on a multi-unit capacity. So this is a tricky condition that we've tried to understand that the first floor unit would be a street facing unit on Merino. There would be a unit in the rear and then one or two, hopefully, units above access by a center stair. And obviously, no architecture has been authored on this yet. It's merely a planning exercise as we're only at that stage. And so in order for us to be able to propose something like this, we are here before this body. And that's sort of the overall description of the project. I've got just a few questions. The property to the south of this lot, it looks like it's got similar dimensions in which you're proposing. I believe that's correct. and you're referring to the one that is image south that has a one story. Yes. I believe that that and the other adjacent lot just to the left of that, if we're looking at this plan as well, a lot of those yacht lots seem to vary, but are approximately that length, and I believe have been that way for many, many years, even back into the early part of the 20th century when this was a little bit more densely populated. And how narrow is that lot? Is that under 25 feet? The one in question, 522, is 18.94 feet wide. So even if this were going to be a single-family home, you would need? We would still need that. This was to be a single-family home, which we have done multiple versions of this on Jefferson Street and some other locations where we've sought a variance to decrease that side yard setback. But obviously things would come into play, such as fire rating and things that would protect the structure if erected. But in order to actually make livable space within that, we're requesting those side yard setbacks. And then the one particular side yard setback that takes it to zero is because of the stair being in the middle of the structure and having the landing protrude into that side yard. So there's some things that are a little bit trickier planning-wise and space-wise that we've had to sort of think through in this initial proposal. Okay. Any questions from – any other questions? Yes, I realize the staff has some concerns about the site entry. So how do you plan to fix that? And your agreement with their condition? So for this particular site, and we've obviously worked with staff on this application, we are not required to have on-site parking. However, we do have rear access from the street or alley behind so that the owner could park there. And there could be street parking as well. we would obviously adhere to the front yard setbacks, but parking is not required, not allowed in that front yard. So there would be, you know, if we had four units, there would be potentially one spot on site, and then there would either be, those folks would have to park on the street or have no vehicle allowable parking on site, or they could work it into the rear. But we're not given the nature of the zoning of the site, not required to have on-site parking, but they do have that alley access in the back if they could fit some spots in there. That didn't quite answer my question. Please. You have designed it as a side entrance. but the staff has recommended a front entrance or a back entrance for what we would have so the first floor unit would have a front entrance which is required so that if you're looking at the building it would have a front entrance in order to access the units up above we have stepped that stair back so that you would have a side entrance to be able to access those two and then the the rear unit could potentially have a would probably have a rear access to it as well does that answer your question yes thank you thank you and you you you recognize the condition that the staff has has imposed i do all right thank you accept those it's hard to read on the sheet what is the what is the length of the lot um one second i'll be able to tell you um our overall length of the lot is 160 feet seven and almost eight inches so 160 feet call it eight inches for congress 18.5 by 168. Yes, that's correct. Thank you. Any additional questions? All right. Sir, if you could have a seat, and we will have the public come up, and one at a time, just state your name, confirm you were sworn in, and you have three minutes to explain your position. Thank you. Hello, my name is Michael Edelin, and I am a resident at 520 Marina Street to the north of that site. Thank you for taking time to meet with us today. As I said, I am a resident of 520 Marino Street. My partner Jack and I have owned our home on Marino Street since August of 2020. I hold degrees in civil engineering and geological sciences from the University of Kentucky and currently work as a local civil designer where I'm pursuing professional licensure in this field of civil engineering. Generally, I work in site development where I closely work with planning and development representatives across the nation. I would like to start by quoting a section from the current zoning ordinance. Section 15-2, subsection B, addresses side yards. Item 1, side yards decrease for a narrow lot, for each foot by which an existing lot of record at the time of enactment of the zoning ordinance is narrower than 50 feet and where the owner of record does not own any adjoining property, 1 1⁄2 inches may be deducted from the required least-width side of any side yard for buildings not exceeding 2 1⁄2 stories in height. In no case may a side yard narrower than 3 feet be at any point. Additionally, Section 18-3, Subsection I, addresses the R4 zoning lot requirements, specifically stating, as required, minimum each side yard 5 feet. Our existing lot currently has a driveway and sidewalk immediately adjacent to our home, place 12 inches from the property line for the adjacent lot being discussed. The issuance of the variance away from the general five-foot side yard setback would allow for building of a proposed structure within arm's length of our existing side door and stoop. This brings up both concerns of privacy as our bathroom window is adjacent to the side door as well as a very real issue of stormwater management. Our current downspout drains across the existing driveway and sidewalk into the 12-inch space between our properties. During heavy rainfall events, this is a large amount of water. The addition of a two-story structure directly adjacent to and between two other existing structures without adequate spacing, appropriate landscaping, and stormwater infiltration will greatly increase the overall impermeable surface area and lead to flooding, pooling, and ponding of water, erosion, and sediment contamination of the surrounding areas and the public stormwater system. There simply is just not enough space without an adequate side yard to provide infiltration as needed. We have additionally invested in our home by insulating and encapsulating the crawlspace beneath our house. Our crawlspace still has groundwater seepage into the area, even with professional insulation of insulating and waterproofing barriers. The addition of another structure within the required zero-foot side yard would surely only lead to further issues with seepage into our crawlspace and likely additional erosion concerns. The requested variances would place an undue burden to our property and would not follow the zoning ordinance minimum requirements of at least three feet of side yard setback as stated, nor the general five foot side yard setback. I implore you to consider the lasting, real, and immediate impacts that this decision will have to our property. Lastly, I do have images of the current state area as well as the previous home that collapsed on that property. If you want, they can put those images on the over screen. Or if there are too many, you can pass them out, Autumn, if there are more than one. They are. Okay. She'll pass those so we can look at them. Yeah. I think, personally, I think they speak for themselves. Thank you, sir. And so if you want to have a seat, if we have questions after looking at the photos, we'll bring you back up. The next gentleman is free to come up. Hello, my name is Thomas Santos. I've been sworn in. Thank you, sir. I'm also a resident of 520 Marino Street. And like my partner Michael said, we purchased our home in 2020. And since we moved in, the structure located on 522 Marino was in severe disrepair and had been for quite some time. When they decided they wanted to take the house down, done so haphazardly and dangerously. The damage started with a brick falling from the chimney and hitting my car, for which we were never reimbursed for the damages by the contractor. In addition, there was no homeowner's insurance on the property at that time. The destruction continued with the house collapsing, with a worker inside gravely injuring him. Given how close our properties are, it was miraculous her home was not directly affected by the collapse. Luckily, we had secured a shipping strap around the fence that ultimately held the house off of ours by mere inches while a portion of the roof was covering our driveway. Had we been parked in our driveway, our vehicles would have been severely damaged. After this, the city deemed it an immediate safety hazard and coordinated the same-day demolition of the remaining structure. Given this, I do not feel a variance should be granted that would allow them to build with less than the minimum 5-foot side yard setback. In December of 2022, we invested greatly in our house with the purchase of solar panels. In the year 2023, we produced almost 10 megawatt hours and five of that was exported onto the grid. So far this year, we have produced 4 megawatt hours and have exported nearly 2 megawatt hours back to the grid. If this proposed 28-foot structure is allowed to be built up to the property line, that would significantly affect our solar production and completely eliminate it at certain times of the year. Michael and I have done a great deal of work trying to improve our property. One of the main things we focused on is our landscaping, which includes frequent mowing and pruning. After the structure next door was taken down in early 2021, the grass in that lot began to fill in. The grass continued to grow unattended to the point the city placed a notice of violation on the property. We contacted the lot owner to make them aware of the notice, which they addressed by intermittently mowing initially. However, this continued to be a recurring issue that greatly affected us considering the proximity to our lot. We eventually offered to tend to the property due to inconsistencies relating to the care of the lot. We regularly mowed, trimmed, and pruned the grass and weeds that were overtaking their lot, and we've continued to do so for the past three years at our expense. We are concerned that if this structure is allowed to be built with any variances, the same level of neglect will negatively impact our property. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Any questions for the witness? Just so I get my bearings, which one is yours, the red brick house or the one with the shutters? The shutters. The one on the right. Yeah. All right. Thank you, sir. Give us a second because we still got to flip through these. I've even looked at them yet, Mr. Clark, so give us a second to look at those. In the meantime, you may come up and if you want to discuss what has been brought to our attention by the neighbors. Yeah, I'm sorry that those elements have taken place on that property. All I can say as far as what we're proposing is the owner approached us because we have a lot of experience working through these types of tight conditions properly and coming to this body before someone's out building a building improperly and trying to do something without a permit or without approval. And so our desire and our goal is to do things right, and if that comes into a design process of working through how we can mitigate some of those items in design and talking about water diversion and things like that, it would be something that would be totally appropriate and something that we would want to do. So I think that we're at kind of the top of the funnel here of just site planning and understanding things and hearing those elements is good and we would want to work through how we could help those adjacent properties not be impacted by that as much as possible. I have a question for you. Could you maybe just give us like an idea of where the stairs would be and then would it go and then which direction would these people be coming and going from? I'm not sure if this is a pointer on here. The very top one. Oh, sorry, I've gone off. This is different than the one before, so I'll... Can we go back to the site plan really quick? You can use your arrow. Okay. There we go. Okay, gotcha. Okay. So, obviously, we... Let's see here. There we go. Gotcha. Okay. So if you'll see in the center is where the proposed internalized stair would be within the structure. So it wouldn't stick proud unless we had our landing, which would go into the three foot side yard setback that we would have. So the building would actually sit off three feet, but we have a three foot side yard setback that we would potentially need the landing of that stair to come into to work. And again, we haven't flushed all this out yet. So we're broad, broad scope on that. But the front of the building, as Mr. Clark brought to our attention, that would have a front door by the requirement for that. So it would have a front entrance. There would be a walkway along the other side, this side of the property, the one that I'm closest to, that they would come up into and go into either the rear unit or the stairs up to the top unit. So it would kind of be a side yard walk, stair up to the both top units, and then access from the rear. Yeah, so where would that land on the house next door? Well, I don't have that on this site particularly, but if we're looking over here at this, right now we're keeping the building set back the required amount, and I can look at that here in a second, but the building could be pushed farther back. You know, the building doesn't have to sit up at that minimum. It could be pushed back, and it could sit back a little bit farther. As you'll see on the site plan here, we have a good bit of leeway towards the rear of the property where that structure could sit. So we have the ability to move that back. And in my statement before where we can work through some of those design things, that may be something that's desired to understand where the best place for that building's front facade to exist may be and where the stair may be. So as far as study outside of this particular site to the adjacent properties, haven't gotten there yet, but that would be something we would want to do. Yeah, and do you know, like, if that structure would be so tall that it would impede the sun or whatever is going to the solar panels? Well, you know, our property is on the south side of their particular lot. So, you know, by the nature of that location, there probably would be some height, you know, like the infiltration of that light may be there. We would, you know, be right up on the site, so it could be from that side. Obviously, with the sun, you know, coming through and arcing, you know, back over this way, this being north, as you'll see from the north arrow there, you know, there could be some of that. You know, that's possible. We have, in the way that we work through our design programs, we do sun studies, so that's something that we can certainly look at. and understand what the impact of that would be. Any additional questions? Okay, thank you, sir. Thank you. I would like to bring one matter to the board's attention, which I did not realize until I saw those photos, that I represent the Lexington Housing Authority that owns the property to the other side. I'm already not recused, so I will abstain from voting. uh... which means not but will go with the majority but i will not be partaking part in the discussions unless the other parties want me to refuse leave the room so to see no objection that we might uh... brown uh... and so i think at this point mister clark i think i would give you the gavel uh... for this case to finish it out and i apologize that i did not so that's all the photos like all that's one of our buildings I recognize the architecture immediately, so I will let you finish out this case. Thank you. Are there further comments from the board on this matter? Anyone? Hearing nothing, I entertain a motion. I'll go. Ms. Plummer has indicated she will make a motion, so go ahead. Thank you. Enfield and redevelopment is often not that tasteful, but we are learning that to preserve land inside the urban services boundary, we have to tighten up and do things that maybe 50 years ago we wouldn't have done. With that in mind, I will vote for our motion for approval of PLA and BOA 2475, Leona Greer Real Estate, A variance to reduce the reduced side yard setback from five to zero on the eastern side of the property. Two, a variance to reduce the required side yard setback from 30 to three feet on the western side of the property. and three, a variance to increase the allowable height from 0 to 28 feet in order to construct a new multifamily residential building within the defined infield and redevelopment area in a medium density R4 zone on property located at 522 Barino Street. I do so support the staff with their recommendations for approval and the two conditions. So moved. Thank you, Ms. Plumey. Do I hear a second? I'll second it, but I will. I hope you hold true to your word because there is a lot of pressure on infill, and nothing more adversely affects the value of your house than your neighbor. And these fellows have been through a lot already. I'm going back and looking at some of these pictures, and it's just junk. So I hope you do stay true to your word and meet with your neighbors. But on that, I will second. Thank you. You are ready for a vote. The vote indicates approval of this application. All right, thank you for your application. So Brendan, what did you have next? Booker group. Booker group on Kempsey Court. Okay, you got it. Thank you. We are ready for PLNBOA 76 Booker Group Investments on, located on 348 Kempsey Court. We have the applicant here. Please come forward and present your case. I should mention our current chair has indicated that he would recuse himself for this particular case. All right. My name is Herbie Booker. We're Booker Group Investments. I'm here presenting 348 Kelsey. This is a two-family construction, new construction. We're asking for 10-foot front variance for the front yard, 7-foot for the back, and 5 and 5 on the sides. That's it. Anything else? No, that's it. Okay, and we have people who would like to speak on this issue. Okay, please come forward one at a time. Good afternoon. Mr. K., if you would identify yourself and give us your address. I'm Steve K. Today, I live at 250 Campsie Place, which is on the corner of Campsie Place and Campsie Court. And I appreciate your allowing me to speak to this proposal. So I'm a long time supporter of infill, and I'm not opposed to the development of the lot at 348, Campsie Court. However, I do oppose one specific aspect of the request before you. and that is the extent of the variance for the front yard setback. I'll explain why and I will propose a modification that would earn my support for the proposal. So while I understand the need for some variance in the front yard setback, I have concerns about the extent of that setback and the reasoning behind the acceptance of the proposal. With all due respect, I question two related conclusions in the staff recommendation. First, that quote, the applicant's proposal features similar front and side yard setbacks to those in the surrounding areas. In the staff report, that conclusion was based in part on the fact that quote, that the requested front yard setback falls between the existing setback of the structures to either side of the property. Second, that the proposal is compatible with the existing development pattern of this neighborhood. So I have a set of pictures that I took this morning. I'd like to show you to illustrate why I disagree with the reasoning of the staff recommendation. Picture one, here we go. Taken from the corner of Camp C Place and Camp C Court, shows the south side of Camp C Place, looking west to MLK. If you could see all the way to MLK, you would see that that line of structure is consistent from one end to the other. I'm going to skip over the pictures two, three, four, and five. Essentially, they show you the other side of Camp C Place, and they show you Camp C Court, and they show you the existing vacant lot. Taken together, they show that in the immediate neighborhood, the setbacks, while less than 30 feet in the present regulations, are entirely consistent. Picture six, which I would like to show, basically shows the two adjacent properties. But I would point out the adjacent property on the left of the property is a corner property. And to use that setback, which is a side yard setback, and to use that as a part of the consideration is inappropriate. So essentially, what I would suggest is instead of a 10 foot setback, go to 17 feet. And that would put the front of the building consistent, not with the edge of all the buildings, but at least the edge of their porches. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you, sir. We have another speaker. Please give us your name and address, please, sir. My name is Jeffrey Lutz, and I live at 251 KMV Place. So I'm opposed basically to no runoff, water runoff study. with the applicant on Thursday or Friday, we discussed this and no study was done. So I did my own study. And there's a website, NOAA, and you can put your address in and they'll tell you for in every once every five years, there'll be a one inch in 15 minute rainfall event. So one inch of rainfall equates to 2,500 gallons on a 4,000 square foot lot there on Campsie Court. This lot may be slightly smaller. It's a terrible amount of water. So this morning in my PJs I went out with my garden hose and I let the hose run in front of his house to see if the water ran away or what it did and it just basically sat there. Now they've been doing some work on the street, new pipes, and the road construction people maybe didn't level the road right, but basically the water just sits there. So said property being landlocked, all the water has to come to the front. And I would like to see a study done by somebody more qualified than me to tell that the rainwater is not going to end up in my basement. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Another speaker? I've been sworn in. My name is Joseph Clements. I own the property to the right and my concerns are the same as is with the rainfall and everything. I also have a basement and being directly next door, I'm concerned about the rainfall. That's my only thing. All right. Very good. Thank you, sir. If the applicant would like to rebut any of those, we don't have any other speakers, do we? Yes. If the applicant would like to rebut those comments and let us know about your position as it relates to those comments. Okay. First, addressing the first one about the setback being at 17 feet. If we scooted back, set back the residence, the dimensions, the square footage of the residence wouldn't be worth building. It would be just like a garage or something to it. So just to get the necessary square footage that we need to build this property, we would need that extra 7 feet. These are opposed to 17. We're asking for 10. And then as far as the rainwater setback, there had to be study done. This was a previous residence there before. So it's just been tore down for years. So when they constructed the whole street and done everything there, there was formerly a house there. So it shouldn't be, I guess, adding just back another resident that's going right back where it was a previous house here. So that study was previously done. all right thank you anything else i've got a question for you the proposed structure is it on a slab or is it going to have a basement it's going to be on the slab any other comments from the board yep so would and you're saying that to reduce it or i'm sorry to increase it from 10 feet to 17 feet just wouldn't because i'm sitting here looking at the pictures it seems like that's pretty consistent with the facade of the other properties and that's i'm assuming even including their porches kind of keeps a consistency you know i mean a continuity at least but yeah with with the infield the way it would be set now that i'm not for sure what it would break that square footage down taking seven feet away from it but i know that would that significantly impact the square footage of the property. So with that being infield development, it's not much off. It's a little bit off, but it's not much. Anything else from the board? Hearing nothing, I would entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I would actually vote against this one just based on that. Camps is a pretty stabilized neighborhood, and I do agree with the need for infill. However, not at the expense of the feel, the aesthetic, et cetera. I think you kind of have to work around certain parameters, and right now the way it stands is it's 30 feet. and I think it's a fairly decent compromise to go to 17 feet so if that's not agreeable I would I would actually be against this application are you are you ready to make a motion in that regard Is there a possibility for a postponement? Because the staff has some questions about two or three items. Autumn, would you make some comments about that? Because I see several things. Sure. So there were a couple of items in the staff report that we mentioned and that we've had conversations with Mr. Booker about, one being the driveway that's shown on the site plan would require additional variances, and two being that the proposed front balconies on the second floor would also require variances. Mr. Booker has indicated that he would be okay with removing the driveway and not having those front balconies so that those variances would not be necessary. So we are comfortable with recommending approval of the variances and just kind of penciling the math for a 17-foot setback instead of a 10-foot setback. currently they're proposing a 930 square foot footprint that would take them down to 713 square feet so staff felt that the variance for that yard front yard setback was appropriate because it was in between the the side yard setback of the adjoining property and the front yard of the adjoining property on the other side typically whenever you're average you're allowed to average front yard setbacks if the other two lots on either side of you both face the same street. So in this case, the project is not able to automatically do that, but by requesting the variance, staff did feel like the averaging made sense here. So that's kind of how we got to the approval recommendation. Any idea what the average was, just out of curiosity? I don't know it off top of my head trickier all right good was is it interesting is there interest in a postponement to to work some these issues or do I hear a motion for disapproval approval rather than go down the path of disapproval i think that would be your best option would be to to postpone and kind of works through some of this stuff and and get with your neighbors and see if you can't kind of figure out a little bit just i do have some concern too of okay let's It's maximizable now you're basically talking about instead of one family and what was it, 750 square feet, you got two and 900 square feet and that's even more. And so I think I would, if you're up for it, would probably postpone it until next month. Is that acceptable to you? Can you step up to the podium please so that we've got you on the mic? what's my options just working it out with the neighbors uh basically what it sounds like is we hit the brakes today and then yeah you talk with with neighbor staff and just kind of come up with a somewhere in between where everybody's happy so who would like say if they don't agree with it and where am i am i just one neighbor stopping me uh no the two i don't think that's it at all it's um It sounds to me like the board would likely, and I'm just spitballing here, but likely would disapprove you today, and that would be the end of the project. You have an opportunity here to postpone it and work through some of these issues, whether it's to give a couple feet here and there or whatever, and then come back before us next month and have it streamlined. I think it's a matter of compromise between your needs and some of the concerns with the neighbors, which we'll come back to the staff. and then you would come back the next month with perhaps a revised plan if you are willing to do that. And if everybody agrees that this is a compromise that can make this project possible. So the only issue that we need to address is the setback. Just the front yard setback. All right. So let me, can I ask this? If we ask for that, can we, can I ask for a variance to scoot it back in the backyard? Will we take away from the front and answer the back? At this point, you can do whatever you want. And that's the thing, too. You might say, well, I'll postpone it. If you guys don't agree, you could bring it back exactly the way it is, and we might have the rest of our board here, and they would go a different direction. I think you're real close, and that's the thing. We appreciate you wanting to build a property here, especially in this climate, and appreciate that you want to do some infill. So it's just real close, but I don't want to see you denied and then not be able to do exactly what you want. All right. Can I also add that if the applicant was interested in scooting the entire building back, they're already asking for a variance to the rear yard as well. if they were to ask for a greater rear yard variance they would need to re-notify neighbors you know you all can approve a lesser variance but you can't approve a greater variance than has been requested and advertised so that's just something to keep in mind to build into the timeline going forward autumn with the postponement be scheduled for the july meeting or we would we need more than a month I think you could go ahead and you could go ahead and it would probably be a continuance rather than a postponement since we had a lot of conversation today and you could continue it to the July hearing but if there was a need to advertise again it might end up being on your August hearing depending on the timeline for when Mr. Brooker was able to get us a revised site plan. So a continuance would make sense at this point? Right. Okay. So do I have do I hear a motion to that extent a continuance for jude to july the eighth mr chair i had to move to continue uh plmboa 24-75 i'm sorry hang on move to continue plmboa 24-76 Booker Group investments for the property at 348 Campsie Drive. I'm moving to continue this case until the hearing, which will be held on July 8, 2024, right back here at 1.30. Thank you. I have a second. Ms. Tucker has seconded. I don't hear any other comments. All right, we're ready to vote. All right, we do have a positive vote for postponement for July the 8th. And I think there are some real possibilities here that we could satisfy, not only your neighbors, but I think you could put together another proposal that would fit the conditions that you're looking for and that we could approve. Thank you, sir. Next. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Clark. Now we're getting ready to go into the short-term rental portion of today's meeting. And so what we'll do is we're going to have staff give an overview before we hear individual cases. And so Autumn, please proceed. All righty. So this will just be sort of my general short-term rental spiel. So since we do have multiple short-term rental applications and we've grouped them all together, I'm just going to give one presentation to go over the regulations and the resources related to short-term rentals. And then we can take each case by case. Oh, okay. I'll speak up, sorry. So the short-term rental regulations were adopted by the council last July. Short-term rentals that were operating prior to this date were allowed to be grandfathered in by January 11th, so that has passed. As of June 7th, the Division of Planning has processed 795 zoning compliance permit applications for short-term rentals. The number that are actually registered is a little bit lower, that 795. includes a few that were denied and some that have gotten their zoning compliance permit but have not followed through with getting their license, possibly because they've decided not to operate and possibly because they've just missed that step in revenue is working towards identifying those individuals and fining them if they are using them as short-term rentals but not licensed. Let's see. So, the zoning ordinance was updated to include short-term rentals. Article 3-13 specifically addresses short-term rentals in the zoning ordinance and then Section 13 of the Code of Ordinances includes additional regulations for short-term rentals related to business licensing and permitting. So here we have the zoning ordinance that relates to short-term rentals. Two new definitions for short-term rentals including hosted and unhosted short-term rentals, The ones that you all see primarily are going to be unhosted short-term rentals. You could potentially review a hosted short-term rental if the applicant was applying to have greater than 12 individuals. That hasn't happened yet in a hosted short-term rental. And then again, Article 3-13 establishes some additional requirements for short-term rentals, including a maximum occupancy of two individuals per bedroom plus an additional four or a total of 12, except for that the board can allow additional occupants if there's sufficient evidence that a greater occupancy will not result in overcrowding or creating a nuisance. So I believe you'll have approved one application where you were able to make that finding. This table is included in Article 3-13 of the Zoning Ordinance and breaks down how short-term rentals are allowed in each zone and how many are allowed per property. This slide speaks more broadly to conditional uses, so this applies to any conditional use that you review, whether it be a short-term rental or whether it be something like you saw earlier for a cocktail lounge, you know, any of the listed conditional uses in our zoning ordinance, you should be making findings that the use will not adversely affect the subject or surrounding properties and that the necessary public facilities and services are adequate for that proposed use. You can always look at things like noise, traffic, parking, compatibility with the neighborhood and the ability of the applicant to comply with other zoning ordinance requirements and other ordinance requirements in our community. Specifically to short-term rentals though, you do have a little bit of extra guidance. In addition to those things that you're looking at for every conditional use that you see, you also should consider the number of short-term rentals that are in proximity to the application before you. Our staff in our staff report generally considers proximity to be about a thousand feet and that's how we're mapping these. You can also review the demonstrated compliance record of the applicant if it's someone who operates other short-term rentals in our community. Another thing that's been a little bit trickier to classify or evaluate has been the occupancy rate of other short-term rentals in the general vicinity. We do hope that possibly with the inclusion of the new software that revenue is getting to track short-term rentals that we may be able to get a little bit better idea about this, but this one has been a little bit trickier. And then finally, you can also evaluate whether other short-term rentals in the vicinity have been cited as a nuisance, including those operated by the applicant. So whenever staff is evaluating these, we are working with other divisions across government, including the police, revenue, and zoning enforcement within building inspection to ensure that we are aware of short-term rentals that have been cited as nuisances, and whether there are any in the vicinity of the applications before you. So every month we send a list of the short term rental applications that we've gotten to those divisions. We're also having frequent meetings with those divisions to discuss short term rentals. So we're trying to give you the best information that we can about complaints that are coming in regarding short term rentals. This shows all of the little green splotches. These are the short term rentals in our community. Again, there are about 730 here that have been approved and are shown on this map. So, again, just kind of walking through how staff is evaluating each of the items that I just went over in Section 3-13. Our staff has established a policy of considering the area within 1,000 feet to be the proximity. You can see the red circles on this drawing here. Those are the maps for today's application. So you see you've got kind of four in this area and then you've got one more over here. And I'll kind of get into details about what we're looking at within that 1,000 feet on the next slide. Then for the second and fourth items on the list, compliance record of the applicant and whether other short-term rentals have been cited, that's kind of what I already talked about regarding our discussions with other divisions and our frequent meetings with those folks. So initially, we were just reporting the number of short-term rentals that were within that 1,000 feet, but we really wanted to try to provide some additional context to that. So we, in the past few months, have started to approximate the number of parcels that contain a dwelling unit that are being used for short-term rental purposes as a percentage to see if there's a concentration forming in a particular area. So we do this by determining first the number of short-term rentals that have received zoning compliance permits within that 1,000 feet. Then we're looking at the number of parcels that are within the 1,000 feet, the number of those parcels that are classified by the PVA as being either residential or multifamily uses and then establishing that percentage based on that number of short term rentals per residentially used properties. So you can see here for this month's cases, everyone is at a percentage of less than 1%, so we don't see any concentrations of short term rentals in the vicinity of any of the five applications before you today. A bit of a caveat to that, since we don't have the exact number of dwelling units within that 1,000 feet, we just have the parcel classification as either residential or multifamily. The percentages can be a little bit inflated depending upon whether it's a neighborhood that is primarily detached single family dwellings or if it has multifamily structures. We are trying to add that context into your staff reports to sort of make the determination of whether that percentage is really quite close or if it may be a little bit off. Another thing that we are considering in each application that you see is how the applicant plans to operate. So if the applicant uses the property as their residence for part of the year and only wants to short-term rent it out for part of the year, we're taking that into consideration because that has a little bit different impact than a short-term rental that is used as a short-term rental 365 days out of the year. So those are things that you're seeing in your reports. And then I want to touch on the Neighborhoods in Transition Task Force report. This task force was established in 2018 to identify ways to protect vulnerable residents from redevelopment in historic areas that are more vulnerable to displacement and gentrification. So those are shown on the map here in sort of the reddish and pinkish colors. Those are the top 10 census block groups that this task force identified as being vulnerable. So we are evaluating whether or not short-term rentals are appropriate. Generally, staff considers them to be inappropriate in these areas. So whenever we are formulating our staff report, we are looking at whether or not a short-term rental is located within one of these areas or if it's in close proximity and particularly whether or not a concentration of short-term rentals may be occurring either in the census block group or at the edges just to ensure that we're not facilitating involuntary displacement and gentrification of these neighborhoods and with that i will take any questions thank you very much autumn i think that was a good summary um any questions from the board uh i had a question uh how how often is that transition report updated that's a good question I don't think that it has been updated. The report came out, I know I said 2017 or 2018, but that was when the task force was formed. The report is more recent than that. It does say within the report that they will update it annually, but I do not believe it has been updated. I think it's a couple of years old at this point. Is there a schedule to update that? I'm not aware of that. I was not involved with that task force. I'm just going on the report that they published, so I don't know what their timeline is for any updates. I can probably find that out for next month. I was just interested in how often that's done and that we have the current data. If that has changed any, maybe not, but it could have changed dramatically. Sure. Thank you. Thank you. Actually, I have a question for legal. Okay. May I do that now? My question for legal is the Board of Adjustment, is it permissible for us to vote on a property for a short-term rental that's within our neighborhood? Our bylaws say that we should not vote on a subject that is, whereas we would profit financially. That is all. And the other part of that was earlier our chairman said that we vote without favor, without fear of favor, I believe it was. So considering those two, I just would kind of like to know where we're going with this. Thank you. So that is, the guide for that is within the code of ethics. And if it's just in your neighborhood, I guess that depends on how close it is in your neighborhood. I would certainly suggest that if it was within 1,000 feet and if you owned a short term rental in that 1,000 feet or maybe if you were also within 1,000 feet, I would suggest recusing for that. Past that, it really would be a question of whether you believe that you could give a fair ruling based on your personal opinions. In that case, you might want to consider abstaining from vote. But to your question, whether recusal would be required, I think it would depend on really your proximity and your involvement with the short term rental. Did I answer your question? Thank you. Yeah, there's not a bright line for us. So I know I've sat on them when they're six, seven blocks away from my house. But then I've recused when I had one that was like six or seven houses down from me. And so I think we each have our discretion on whether or not we feel it's too close for us to want it to go one way or the other because of where we happen to live. I just hope that each board member can remain just in each item that comes before us, and that's one of them. i think i think it would be as you said a personal yes i absolutely agree with what mr gross said i think the only the only case there would be a clear line would be if it were your shirt terminal that were before the board or one that perhaps your your business or family member had an interest in that case you would absolutely need to recuse but otherwise yes i think what you said it is correct thank you any additional questions for staff well i thank you autumn very much for that summary Just so that everyone in this room knows, we did not adopt the short-term rental ordinance. The Urban County Council did. And so they did not ask us our personal opinions about it. We essentially deal with the law as written, not necessarily as we would like it to have been written. And so just everyone realizes that. The other thing is, is that we've been two hours now, so I'd like to go ahead and take a five-minute break so that people can use the restroom and get a little bit of water. And so we'll be back at 3.36. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Walker will be back in a second, but I figured we could go ahead and start discussing some items. So the first thing is, so we're now in the short-term rentals. I list one, two, three with staff's recommendation of approval with no opposition. We'll have those cases heard first. And then I have one, two cases in which staff has recommended approval, but we have members of the public who want to speak. So with that being said, I'm going to go ahead and call PLN BOA 24-65, Armor and Terros. Close? Armor and Terros, yeah. Property Group, LLC. And this is in reference to 639 Cecil Waste. This is PLN BOA 24-65. The staff has recommended approval. If you could first state your name. So I'm Cardinals Armenteros. I'm the owner of Armenteros Property Group. I've been in business for over 10 years. We own 32 short-term rentals. Most of them, Slate, Kentucky, and all the areas of Kentucky, will be the first one in Lexington for us. So we're excited about the opportunity. Okay. And then you were sworn in earlier? Yes, sir. Okay. Well, in that case, I will turn it over to the board and see if any members have any questions or want to hear more about the project. I want to know what's going on with the ditch. The ditch? Yeah. So the sewer line broke when we got the house, so we had to replace the whole sewer line all the way to the connection with the city. That's what happened. And there are several citizens' comments against it online, which means that they wrote in, and so then they put them on the computer for us to look at. Okay. Well, Ms. Tucker, were there any comments on those objections that you would like the applicant to respond to? No, because I'm not the one that made the comment. Okay. That works for me. Oh, yes. Let's see. You have 32? Yes, ma'am. Are they where? So most of them in Slate, Kentucky, in the Red River Gorge area. We got six in Georgetown, Kentucky. We got one in Bourbon County. We got, that's about the bulk of them. We've been in business. We started with long-term rentals, and then we moved into short-term. So we have both, actually. we provide housing mostly in georgia and kentucky as a long-term rental as well so we do both um are there any other questions i noticed you had a on the driveway side you had a hot tub sitting there is that going in in the back it's going to go in the back yes is that going to be in the addition that has been constructed on the back of the house or is that going to be separate it's going to be on the yard on the outside did that answer your question so the yard is big enough to set up to set up on a concrete pad so that's what we're going to go to So part of the business to attract, you know, so the whole idea of the short-term rentals to attract nursing or healthcare professionals, so that's what we're going to focus on the most. The reason we're asking for the permission is because some of these guys actually travel for less than 30 days, you know, so we're asking permission to do that. So we're going to be focusing on that. I used to work at UK Healthcare, so I had connections over there still. I know the need is very vast for that community. So you've got, I just want to verify here, it says you've got three bread-bearing units. You could have a maximum occupancy of 10. You've reduced that down to four. What do you do that for? Well, because of the community. You know, I've been actually talking to the neighbors and I want to make sure that we don't disrupt the living areas and stuff like that. So we have talked to them about it and they want to make concern they have is actually a parking situation, you know. So in order to address that, when I keep it to force, we only have two cars, both parking the driveway that won't affect anybody in the neighborhood. Yep. How many bedrooms? Three. Okay. So even though you'd be entitled to many more people during the ordinance, you're asking for four and you're willing to be limited to four. Absolutely. Well, that's always appreciative. Well, any more questions? Anyone want to make a motion? Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion. I'd like to just indicate that on this application it says District 1 and I think if there's any need for changing that, it is District 10 if we need to make that change. Otherwise, it looks like the agenda is correct and the report just has a typo. All right, good. Mr. Chair, I recommend I move for approval of PLNBOA 2465, the Armenteros Property Group, request for conditional use permit for unhunted short-term rental in a single-family residential zone on property located at 639 Cecil Way based on the staff's recommendation and the four conditions as listed. Okay, we have a first and Mr. Walker has seconded. Does anyone want to discuss? Yes, Ms. Plumlee. I want to make comment if I may. You may. And my comment would be that indeed short term rentals equals business use in a residential zone. And I think this applicant more than exemplifies that with 32, not all in Lexington, but here and yonder. This house on Cecil Way, the appraised price would be over $200,000, which puts it into a category that is a need for a purchase for a permanent resident or a permanent rental and for that reason i i would be opposed to this approval thank you miss plumley any other comments before i call the vote hearing none um don if we could have the uh there we go Well, we have a tie vote, which means the board has taken no action. Unfortunately, I'll let legal explain what that means now. So this board cannot take action without a majority vote, which. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay. This board cannot take action without a majority vote, which since we have six people that would require at least four voting either aye or nay. So in essence, the board can't do anything further with this application. So she's saying your application has not been approved. While it's not been denied, you need an approval. And so unfortunately, your application was not approved today. May I say something? You may. So to answer, Ms. Caroline, the property right now is probably worth $350,000. So we bought the house and we have put a significant amount of money. The house at the moment in that neighborhood, it will sell today for $350,000. It's not $200,000. So I just want to make sure that you're aware of that because that doesn't, you know, the $200,000 in that neighborhood doesn't apply anymore. So I want to make sure that we all know that. And we as a business have put a significant amount of money into this property. and we do good business. You know, we actually, you know, we host last year 720 people from all over the United States, you know. So some of that people is going to come to Lexington if you guys move to approve this, you know. We're great at it. We're one of the best at it, you know. So denying this is just going to hurt our business because we are, we have put a significant amount of money counting on that proposal. And we have talked to the neighbors to make sure that that's the case. On the flip side of that, we also provide long-term rentals. We have rentals in Lexington. We have rentals in Georgetown. I'm going to go ahead and stop you. We appreciate your comments. Unless somebody wants to change their vote, raise your hand. In that case, your application was not approved today. So we're going to move on to our next case. Thank you. which bring us to our next, whoops, pardon me. Our next case, which is PLM BOA 24-70 Purple Door Management. This is for a short-term rental at 102 Glass Avenue. It is on page six, item number six. If you could, please state your name and confirm you were sworn in. Apologies, I was not sworn in if I could do that. Raise your hand, please. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. And your name? My name is Nicholas Hudson. I'm the owner of Purple Door Management. Okay. And then the staff has recommended approval based upon four conditions, and you've seen those? Yes, sir. And you are agreeable to those? Yes, sir. Okay. So please tell us about your project. Certainly. So this is a home that served as a primary residence before my wife and I were married. She designed it and built it. She lived there with her daughter from a prior marriage. And once we became a little more serious, we had a daughter on the way as well. We needed a bigger home. So we kept this home with the intention to rent it as a short-term rental. And in another four years, it's going to go to our oldest daughter, who's 14, when she goes to UK. So this is a way for us to keep the house, to not have to sell it, and then to be able to provide her some kind of her own living affordable housing when she gets to college. Her plan right now is to go to UK. So you said your wife had the house built? Yeah, she designed it and built it. Okay. Good for her. It's very cool if you haven't seen it. And there's no one in the public that wants to speak on this application? Okay, so I will open it up to questions from the committee. Okay, hearing no questions and no comments, I will open it up for a motion from one of my committee members. Mr. Chair, I would move to approve PLMBOA 24-70. Is that one more? Yeah, Purple Door Management LLC request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short term rental in a single family residential zone on property located at 102 Glass Avenue. Based on staff recommendations and subject to the four conditions. Thank you, Mr. Walker. Is there a second? A second. We have a second for Mr. Clark. Any comments? All right, I will call it for a vote. Okay, your application has been approved today. Good luck. Thank you very much for your time. The next item for us to, on the abbreviated docket, is item number seven on page six, PLMBOA 2472, Blake Hendricks. This is regarding 3532 and a short-term rental. Mr. For the applicant, please come forward. You can state your name for the record. My name is Blake Hendricks. Good afternoon, Mr. Hendricks. And were you sworn in? I was. Thank you. The staff has recommended approval based upon the four conditions. Have you seen those? I have. And those are okay with you? They are. Perfect. Is there anyone here in the audience who wants to speak on this application? Okay. Seeing none, please tell us about your project, and then I'll open it up for questions from the commissioners, and then we'll have a vote. Sure. This property is a five-bedroom, two-bath home in the southern part of Lexington. The idea would be to target more midterm, short-term rentals. This would be our second, first in Lexington Airbnb. I think that's all I have to say about it. Thank you. So you said there are how many bedrooms? Five. Five bedrooms? Okay. Any questions from my fellow members? Thank you. Ms. Plumlee? Did you state how long you've owned the house? I've owned the house for almost two years. Thank you. Any additional comments, questions, anyone want to make a motion? Mr. Meemis Tucker. I just wanted to make a comment that there is a petition online with quite a few names on it. with your neighbors and a couple of opposition statements. Is that it? So, Ms. Tucker, were those comments directed toward the board? no but sometimes were you aware of this i was not aware of this yeah so sometimes i think the applicants don't get what we get and so um there's a lot of camelot drive people who are in opposition to this i just think that they need to be made aware well i'm i'm concerned that they're not here well just what looking at something online bothers me a little bit well she says online too she's she's talking about the the packet the inside i think there are two issues i think the first issue is making sure that and we as a board may want to address it with staffs making sure the applicant gets copies of anything that gets submitted to them so we do not share copies with the applicant unless they request them okay um with because we're taking in letters until 10 a.m the morning of the hearing you know we don't always have time to do that so we get them to you all in your packet but unless an applicant has requested that we share those with them we don't automatically do that and so we may just have that as a board discussion later if we want to make sure that copies are at least available at the hearing so that applicants can see them so So I think that's the first issue with Ms. Tucker. And so the second issue is you saying you should show up. Yeah. So I think you both are – I just want to make sure you guys weren't talking past each other. Yeah. I agree. I just used to have a full-time job, and I wouldn't have been able to show up. But I think it's important to be heard, whether it's a document that's in it or somebody's standing before the podium. And the reason we know is we do look at them before we have our hearing. So, okay. So, with that being said. Well, to that point as well, I don't. There's a petition, but it doesn't say what the petition is for. It just says conditional use. I'm assuming it's not in favor. I'm assuming as well, but. I've never seen 100 people vote in favor for an SDR. Yeah. I think lack of language yields the first, but yeah. All right. To circle back around and round up these doggies, does anyone want to make a motion one way or the other? I will move for approval of PLNBOA 2472 by Blake Hendricks' request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a single-family residential zone on property located at 3532 Camelot Drive, based on the staff's recommendation and the four conditions as posted. Thank you. i've got um harry with the first bob with the second um any comments thank you mr chair um again this is a business as you know in a residential zone and the value of this house is approximately 300 or less again it would be a home for a permanent resident or long-term rental that it's been removed from that availability. And we all know about affordable housing, the great need that there is for affordable housing today. For that reason, I would be opposed to this approval. Thank you, ma'am. Any other comments? Seeing none, I'll call the vote. Your application has been approved. Good luck. Thank you. Okay. So we are down to, sorry, my pages are, I'm looking for, there it is. So we're down to two cases. Both these cases will be heard. So we will essentially go through the same process we went through earlier. We'll let the applicant have an opportunity to discuss the project. And then we will allow members of the public to speak. And it looks like Hillendale. Who's the Hillendale? I'm Hillendale. Okay. Okay, so what we'll do then is when it's time for the public to speak, I'll have you line up and just take you one at a time at three minutes. That way we have an idea of how long it's going to take. And it looks like Hill and Dale's up first. So this is, I'm going to call on item five on page five, PLNBOA 2469, Letha Pash Lewis's conditional use for 253 Hillandale Road. Good afternoon. If you could state your name for the record. Letha Pash Lewis. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Hi, I'm Brittany Tilly. I am granddaughter and supporter. Okay. And you guys were both sworn in is my recollection. Yes. Okay, perfect. So in this instance, the staff has recommended approval with four conditions. Have you seen those? Yes. Okay. And you are okay with those? Yes. All right. So what I'm going to do is why don't you tell us about your project, as you've seen from prior testimony. Just give us a little bit of history of the property. Okay. And at that point, I will let the public come up. then you will have an opportunity to address any issues they may have raised, and then we will then bring it to the committee. So please proceed. Thank you. I purchased this property in 1989, so I'm well-vested in this community, this neighborhood. For the last 10 years, we've used it as rental property, long-term rental property. And as I learned about short-term rental, it appealed to me and interests me because I could get in and do more maintenance and maintenance. And I'm sorry, this is not my forte. I'm not used to speaking. That's why I brought her with me. I have two companies that are specialized in Airbnb. We're very well focused. I'm partnered with, like, Michael LaFonte and big-time short-term rental people. So I do this for a living. But I think what she's trying to say is, you know, we are neighbors to this community. I grew up here. My whole family has grew up in this home. And long-term renting just raises some concerns. Honestly, if we are not approved today, the house will sit unless we move midterm. So as far as concerns with it could be used for something else, it's going to sit. I don't have any plans in selling it. Yeah, it will stay. And then as far as what she's saying is we want to be able to come in and keep the house maintained. We have a whole team of people who go in and clean the home. And you guys obviously have laws and regulations in place for us to do what we need to on our behalf to make sure that there is no disruption to the neighborhood. And like I said, like we've all lived there. And so we understand everyone's concerns as well. But this is just something, you know, she wants to come in and do. She's retired. And like I said, I do it for a living. So she has all the support and assistance. and we are here to hear everyone's concerns and respectfully address them. Yeah. And I do have a couple of things I saw. I did see the opposed letters or e-mails that were sent in, and neighbors on each side of me are, I have a very good relationship with them, and they watch the property for me now, and they have my phone number, and they text or e-mail me with any concerns, And I'm willing to share that phone number, my phone number, with anyone in the neighborhood. And I'm willing to work through any problems that they may have. And the parking, if you look at the site plan, there is availability to park back there. You could park six vehicles back there. There's a two-car garage, turnaround spot. So there's ample parking. There's no reason why anyone should park on the street. And that driveway there, I know I saw someone that mentioned that it's a shared driveway. Technically, it's not a shared driveway. That is two independent driveways that are connected. His goes straight into his garage. Mine goes up around the house and back to the back in front of a two-car detached garage. And as far as security, we have security cameras already outside. that I can see any time of the day or night. And my neighbors, I depend on them a lot. I mean, they even questioned me when I had people working out in the garage one night. They called and said, hey, are these people supposed to be here? We hope to have a good relationship with our neighbors because that helps us to know what's going on with the property as well. We care about this property a lot. Like I said, it's not a city if nothing else happens with it. But so, I mean, we care for everybody who has concerns and would like to move forward with this. And how many bedrooms? Because I know in the Southland area, you could go anywhere from two to four, depending on which house it is. We have two bedrooms in the basement and two upstairs. So you have a total of four bedrooms? Yes, and two baths. And you're agreeing to cap the individuals to six per night? That's what it says. Yes, but I may advertise for four just because of the party issue that I'm hearing. And I want to market it toward traveling professionals. Yes. I also have a property here in Lexington that I manage, and I know that we were allowed to have 10 people in this property. I only allow five, and the reason is because it's 1,200 square foot, and that's just not feasible, especially for noise and issues just having that wear and tear on the property. So, again, we care about it. Well, I grew up in a house on Stratford, 1,000 square feet, four boys, two parents, and a dog. So you can make it work. I don't recommend it. It wasn't fun, but you can make it work. So any questions for these ladies? I have a question. Do you all share a driveway? No, it's not a shared driveway. Not technically, no. It's two independent driveways that are right next to each other. And his goes into his garage and mine goes up and around behind the back property. Okay. It was all paved, though. There's no grassroot. It is all paved, yes. Did you pave it? Yeah. And, yeah, basically we did that because of the elderly neighbor when I lived there many years ago. We kind of up kept the whole, we took care of the whole thing. Yeah. Ms. Plumlee, do you have something? but you're staying with six but there's nothing else for uh... the applicant then out he has one of the c uh... here and what do come back up people in the public uh... please commit lineup anyone who wants to speak on this particular case and then he probably know the routine by now give me your name confirm you were sworn in in the u each at three minutes to uh... give us your comments the content and john's really uh... i was born outlaws as i said i'm john straley my wife and i we live at two fifty eight hillendale road we have lived at our current resident since nineteen eighty seven i would like to express my opposition to granting a conditional use permit at two fifty three hillendale in my area of hillendale road there is an str over saturation problem actually there Currently a total of five STRs within 250 feet of my house. In fact, there is a hosted Airbnb across the street from me at 261 Hill and Dale that has three different rentals available on one property. The owner rents a spare bedroom, basement apartment, and a tiny home in the backyard. They also have another unhosted Airbnb at 281 Hill and Dale. I also live two doors down from the unhosted large house at 270 Hill and Dale, 130 feet from my house. Noise has been a problem for the immediate neighbors, including myself, three doors down, especially when the guests are having a hot tub party in the backyard. The homes on Hillendale are close together. Noise is an unavoidable problem, especially when a large group is outside. Street parking is a problem due in part to single lane driveways. At 261 Hillendale, the owners park in their driveway, so all the guests must park on the street. There are constant noise problems, day and night, with multiple cars parking in front of our home. My neighbors that live at 257 Hill and Dale are elderly, they're an elderly couple that have lived there for many years. They're next to the three hosted STRs, and it's 261, and on the other side is the proposed unhosted Hill and Dale at 253. I think no one in Lexington should have to live in between two STR properties. 253 Hillendale, its driveway with 249, it's a connected or shared, they're right paved together, if you want to call it that. People will park on the street to avoid that driveway congestion and not being getting blocked in because it's a single driveway. There's a young couple that lives next door. They have two kids, and it'll be a precarious situation, very noise for them. with having this going on right next door. Short-term rentals have no positive benefit for our neighborhood, in my opinion, will be a long-term detriment to the quality of life for those that actually reside in the Hillendale neighborhood. We should all work together to preserve Lexington neighborhoods like Hillendale from being taken over by short-term mini-hotels. Thank you. And real quick, before you leave, just so I can... how many there's five there's five and uh... i had a little discussion with her about it but you can go on airbnb and if you shot sir tiny house in lexington you'll see what i'm talking about it's uh... tiny home in the backyard with a compostable toilet alhouse what as unfortunately our staff goes by I know. Your information is not right. But you need to know that there's four Airbnbs in addition to the one that is at 2-7. That's why we have the public. Okay, thank you, sir. And I'll let the staff in the public comment address anything at that time. Really into that. Thank you. I have a question for staff. Do you think some of those are illegal that he pointed out? Yes. We found that there was one that had a zoning compliance permit within the 1,000 feet. We are aware of at least two others that Revenue and Building Inspection are currently investigating and sending letters to that are operating illegally currently. And then some of the others that he mentioned we will have to investigate further. But they are likely unlicensed because they are unlicensed if they're operating. I would like to thank anyone who points out illegal SDRs because there's a lot of them out there. And I know the city is trying to bring those into compliance, and that is a problem. So we need statistics that are accurate and timely to know where these SDRs are located. So if you run into any of those, please report those to the planning department. Hi, I'm Jennifer Bailey. I live at 2489 Eastway Drive. I have not been sworn in, so I need to be. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear, affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, sir. Thank you, ma'am. Actually, my purpose here today is to give voice to the neighbors that will be in between the illegal or unregistered short-term rental property with the four and the current one or the one that this is about today, 253. neighbors are 93 and 98 years old and they wanted me to read this today. LFU Board of Adjustment we are Roy K. Bowman Golda Bowman. We have owned a home at 257 Hillendale Road since 1955. It has been a great neighborhood and wish to keep it that way. We will be between two short-term rentals and a lot of coming and going and feel it will downgrade the neighborhood. We note Roy Bowman no, Golda Bowman no. As for parking 261 Hill and Dale most times has five cars to park, has max five cars to park. She hand wrote this so I'm just reading directly. If you want you can hand that to staff and they'll keep that in the record. Of course. And then there's someone else who lives next to the one that actually is registered. Her name is Terry Steele, and she wanted me to give her a voice today as well. Good afternoon. I hope this message finds you well. My name is Terry Steele, and I reside at 266 Hillendale Road in Lexington, along with my husband and son. I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding the proposed short-term rental at 253 Hillendale Road. Terry is a nurse and she works long hours. That's why she couldn't come today. Having lived next door to a short-term rental and across the street from four others, my family and neighbors have encountered numerous challenges, particularly concerning noise disturbances and parking issues. Often these rental homes are occupied for bachelor parties, Keeneland events, and other large group gatherings. The noise disturbance caused by guests engaging in loud conversations in the middle of the night has been particularly disruptive. While none of these instances has warranted police intervention, they are extremely annoying, especially on work and school nights. Parking is another major concern. Several times our daughter, who lives on campus at UK, has come home to find strangers' cars parked in front of our house and our driveway filled with our cars. Their driveways filled with their cars, and there's nowhere for her to park, so she has to park far away. This leaves her with no choice but to park in front of someone else's house, causing a domino effect. So it just gets farther and farther down the road. Furthermore, the presence of unfamiliar individuals due to short-term rentals raises significant safety concerns for children in our neighborhood. Thank you for taking the time to consider my concerns regarding this matter. Short-term rentals are too many. I didn't get to finish it all. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? A map? Come on up. Gail Whitener Good afternoon. I'm Gail Whitener and I'm the president of the Hill and Dale Neighborhood Association. We're going to get a map that shows the existing illegal ones, the proposed ones, and the legal one at 270. Just a comment about the staff report. Staff is generally supportive of this application. Proposed use should not have an adverse influence on the neighborhood or traffic. A bit of a maybe unrelated comment, but construction of the nearly finished seven condos at 375 Pasadena, future development of 363 Pasadena will require closure of the outlet from Sunseeker to Pasadena. As a result, connection of Stub Streets to Sunseeker to Hillendale, then to Eastway will add a great burden to Hillendale Road as a connector out of the neighborhood. There will be a lot more traffic there. Now the people, and that's a very pesky consideration. Much scorned by the nearby neighbors of the 302 unregistered SDRs at 261, which all of that's already been mentioned. Brad at Revenue verified the status of the unverified ones along with the one at 270 being already legal. Neighbors' concerns are not new to the world of STRs. Unrelenting noise, dog poop not cleaned up, trash, and parking. A question by nearby neighbors is, where do my guests park if all spaces are taken up by the transient inhabitants of five SDRs? An added thought about the plight of the elderly couple at 257. By approving this STR and its and the other STR's proximity to elderly neighbors, a dangerous precedent would be set by planning staff to run roughshod over consideration of the welfare of long-established residents of the neighborhood. Several neighbors were reluctant to attend this meeting. Some disclosed fear of retaliation by some of the existing providers. A few said they sent letters, and I think you have those. So you see, our insistence is for your consideration of the real people who have voiced their valid concerns and fears. Statistics should not take the place of cold, well, let me do that again. Statistics about what should or should not take place are cold speculations when applied to people's lives in these isolated situations. such as 253. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Is that the end of public comment? Autumn, do you want to quickly address the short-term rentals that were brought to our attention? Sure. So we received a copy of the map that was just passed out, so I will be sharing that with revenue and zoning enforcement staff to see if those are, in fact, operating as short-term rentals and to pursue those coming into compliance, which would involve them applying for conditional use permits. Again, we are aware of one that is licensed in the 1,000-foot area and at least two that are being investigated currently, as of the time of our staff report being written. And my recollection was the staff does not take in illegals in the analysis, this since they will likely be shut down? Right. So the thought is that we included in our staff report that we were aware of two other unregistered short-term rentals that were being investigated, but we did not recommend disapproval of an application. We don't recommend disapproval of an application because there are other short-term rentals that are not registered in the area because the short-term rental that is before you is going through the correct process. They're attempting to come in, go through the conditional use process to be approved. So the others that are operating without being registered, unlicensed, again, we are looking to find those and to investigate whether they're operating. And if we find that they are, they are being directed to go through this exact same process. So, you know, their record will be taken into account whenever they apply. So we do see that there's a little bit of an unfairness to punishing the person who's coming in first just because someone else is doing something illegally in their area. No, and I appreciate that. And I think it's hard to punish somebody going through the proper procedures with bad actors who are not doing so. So I understand the staff's position. Any questions for staff or for the public before I bring the applicant back up? I have a question for staff. If there is illegal short-term rentals out there, are they allowed after they're identified to possibly come in? Yes. So our goal is always compliance. So if we find that someone is doing something that requires a conditional use permit and that they haven't gotten that conditional use permit, they're always given the opportunity to make that application. And zoning enforcement will typically, and I think revenue is doing the same, will typically sort of hold off on fines or that kind of thing to give that person time to go through the process so long as they can show evidence that they're moving through, that they've corresponded with planning staff to get an application packet that they're filing on time. You know, enforcement staff will give them deadlines to do that sort of thing, but they are always going to be given the option to come into compliance if it's possible. Thank you. And total side note, I'm assuming that underneath our local regulations, compost toilet is not permitted in the city. I don't think so, yeah. And that would be a tiny house in the backyard would likely be an accessory dwelling unit. And since we have had very few of those permitted, I would expect that the structure was not permitted as an accessory dwelling unit and would have to meet those standards. They have to also before they could apply for a conditional use permit. My recollection is for a short term rental. For an ADU, you still need to have electric, water, sanitary sewer permits. It's unlikely that they can meet the requirements for an accessory dwelling unit. But they would have to go through that process first. And we're going to look into that property? Yes. All right. Thank you very much. If it's one of the ones that we have heard an address for. I believe it was on this map, but if not, the gentleman, feel free to give it to the staff. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, they're on here. Okay. Both of those are on here. Okay. It's on the record. All right. Thank you. Any other items? Okay. If the applicant wants to come back up and address any of these issues. The first thing I would like to say is it is unfortunate that there are illegal short terminals out there and I hate that neighbors have gone through what they have. I will also say that part of the fall is hosts that are not running it like a proper business and don't have care. And unfortunately those hosts might not be putting in their own rules for the parking and doing what they need to on their end. that's something we aim to address as well for us so that there's no parking issues and that there's no noise issues there's even noise aware that can be put into the homes where we are always alerted if there's a rise of a noise inside the home just things that we can do to prevent some of that yeah there's plenty of things that we can implement in our processes to make sure that the neighbors don't have any issues and can come to us so that way if there is a concern that we can handle it I really don't know what else to be said I mean we hear everybody out and we've been neighbors ourselves like I hate when someone parks in the street drives me nuts yeah and the we there's no reason like I said it at my home there's at this house this residence there's plenty of parking in the back and I will request that if it's approved that's one of my goals is a request that they all park in the back no parking in the side or in the front of them on the street yeah maybe unless like loading or unloading all right thank you very much if you want to have a seat I'm going to bring it back to the board so at this point unless a board member has questions we're done with the public portion of the hearing and I will let you go yes I you may you may kick it off miss Plumlee thank you mr. chair in I think in light of what the information that neighbors have revealed the uh... short-term rentals that even though they may be cloaked at the moment to us and to other people uh... there are still there so i think i'd like to talk with legal before we do that let's see first off is there anyone who wants to move for a motion to approve Sure. Yeah. We'll take that route first, and then we'll see how it goes. Okay. Mr. Chair, I move to approve PLMBOA 24-69. I've already butchered this. I'm sorry, but is it Lathiah? Yeah, number five. Okay. Ash Lewis, request for conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a single-family residential zone on property located at 253 Hillandale, road based on staff's recommendations and subject to the four conditions is there a second mr. Clark seconds any discussion on this motion all right hearing none I will call it for a vote Okay, so we have a tie, which means your application was not approved. And since you need an approval to move forward, you will not be able to use a short-term rental at this property. Anything over 30 days would not, is that correct, Autumn, as long as it's 30 days, it's not a short-term. That is correct. A short-term rental is defined as being less than 30 days. So anything over that would be allowable by right. Great. Okay. Thank you for coming. And thank you, members of the audience, for coming too. All right. So we have one last case. I know one of the witnesses has informed me that she will need to leave, but I believe she has delivered her statement. Yes. If you want to deliver it, unless you're going to stick around to read it, if so... Please come up to the podium if you're going to speak. Hi there, I'm Janet Kavanis, 704 Cumberland Road, and I live in the Stonewall area. I talked to Brandon in the middle of things and hope I didn't put him on the spot. I have prepared remarks, which the former president, Leah Atkinson Brown, has agreed to read. Okay. And we can also pass those out if that's okay. That sounds perfect, Janet. So if you want to have a seat, then we'll get the case going and it's worked out. Thank you so much. Good luck with your other appointment. Yes, ma'am. So with that being said, I'm going to call our last case, which is PLN BOA 24-77, Christian Perry's request for a conditional use permit at 786 Bravington Way. Thank you, ma'am. Good afternoon. I don't really know where to begin. How about we begin with your name? Oh, Christian Perry. And I have been sworn in. If you could. There we go. There we go. Perfect. And then if you were sworn in? Yes. All right, perfect. The staff has recommended approval based upon six conditions, including one in which you agree you will not have this be a short-term rental more than 90 days per year. Yes, because I still live at the home. Okay. So now, with that being said, please proceed. Okay. My name is Christian Perry. I live at 786 Bravington Way. I purchased the house in 2017. I own a business here I own a business in Bowling Green, Kentucky and I'm expanding into other states and so I do travel a lot for business and so that is my reasoning for wanting to be able to do this so the only time I will be operating is a short term rental and I just kind of ballpark the 90 day number I don't even think I'll get close to that but I just wanted the option to do it for extra income when I'm not at the residence okay and then real quick this is really for the audience you're agreeing that if you sell the house or if this is no longer your primary residence that your permit would be gone yes okay perfect well you don't have anything else you want to add? no. okay I'll open it up then to commission members do you have any questions for the applicant or the staff? Okay. In that case, if you could have a seat. Those who would like to speak today, please come forward and line up, and we'll have you speak one at a time. We have received this, which I believe will be read into the record, but a copy has been handed to us and we're looking at it right now. And so it will be the same routine for everyone. If you could give me your name, confirm you were sworn in, and then you will be limited to three minutes each. And I don't think we have to worry about it with a group of only six, but if you could not be repetitive, that would be great. Thank you. Sir, please. My name is Neil Conrad. I don't think I was sworn in. I didn't raise my hand for anything. Anyone else not sworn in? All right, let's do them all at once. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you very much. I really have just two things. One is a concern, and the other is a question, okay? And because I don't quite understand all of it, under what we've read, he is planning to close off the downstairs to the people that are renting the house. Now when he does that, he closes off one egress out of the house. And he's allowing nine people in the house. So theoretically, he's got a front door and a back door, and the exit out the basement is now no longer available to them. So I just want to make sure the fire marshal sees that, understands that, and approves it if they're going to go through this. That's number one, and we'll let Autumn answer in a second. What's your second one, sir? I'm sorry? Oh, she'll answer your first question, but you said you had a second item? The second item is a concern. That house sits right on the corner of Bravington and Grasmere. And there's a stop sign as you come up Grasmere, you go through a stop sign to go to the next part of Grasmere. The house sits right on that corner. The driveway that he says people are going to park in is on the Grasmere side of the house. He's locked that door to them. So people are going to park on the street because they've already done it, because I think he's been using it. But there's always cars parked on that street, and it's very difficult when you come up to that stop sign to actually see well when you've got three or four cars parked in front of that house. The entrance is the front of the house. That's the entrance that they're going to have to use because he's closed the other one off. So that's a concern. Thank you, sir. So we'll have Autumn answer the egress issue, and then we'll ask the applicant about whether or not he's been using this property already for an SDR, and also how operationally he's going to handle this parking situation. Thank you. We've got notes. yes sir my name is philip johnson i live at 3356 grassmere drive it's about six or seven houses away and i got a copy of the board of adjustment staff case report and i wanted to bring up two or three issues on that the first is Mr. Perry it's approved because he has no record of short-term rental compliance issues which I would agree with at this point. But there's also a recommendation of approval made subject to the following conditions. And I'm quoting all necessary permits and approval shall be obtained from the divisions of revenue planning prior to commencement of use. It's point number four. Prior to commencement of use, this was rented about 10 days ago. I personally witnessed people coming into the house. So if he's, my point being, he's already not complying. The second is there's this public sign up there and it's been removed about three times. One neighbor said he called and complained about it. Another neighbor told me he saw it sitting in the yard and he went over and got mad and stuck it back in himself. The third issue I would like to bring up, and I believe there's an inaccuracy in the staff case report, it states, it's on page one under project description, parking for the use of this will be accommodated in the existing garage and driveway and can accommodate up to six vehicles. I obtained a copy of Mr. Perry's application. It states plainly on here that only the main floor of the house is accessible to guests. Page 2 plainly states the garage off limits to guests. You cannot park three cars if the garage is off limits to guests. Which leads to my next point that my friend and neighbor brought up about the parking in front. It gets jammed at times. You can't see. There have been instances a couple of weeks ago, I believe it was being rented, and you're entering the four-way the intersection you you have to move your car into the intersection to see if traffic is coming those are are my points and I've got 12 seconds but there are other unlicensed short-term rentals in the area I know that's not our issue but we're living there and we have to deal with it thank Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Hi, I'm Amy Chappell Hamlin and I live at 3416 Grasmere Drive. The house that's in question is three doors down from my house. The driveway to the residence is on Grasmere. A former resident that lived there had a father who was ailing, and the neighborhood allowed them to expand the driveway so that they could get his van in and out of that house. Because in this neighborhood, we love each other and we take care of each other. In front of this residence, there's the spot where the farm was that Spindletop was built on, and there's two large oak trees on that road. The road narrows there so that people can pass through. So all these complaints about parking are affected by the way that road is constructed there. Today there was a bulldozer right in front of that house and I could not get around to get out of my street. Our, uh, Grasmere Drive is the way that most folks get out to Manowar to go to Keeneland. We, there's going to be more traffic that this brings in, and whether Mr. Perry says he's going to have little old ladies staying at that house. I know for a fact that if a group comes in that wants to party there in that pool, he will not deny them that right and he will definitely take their money. So as a resident of Stonewall for 54 years, I would like for my home to be my residence not his commercial gain. Thank you so much. Thank you, ma'am. Ready? Yes. Oh, okay. I was looking at an aerial of this problem. Apologies. I'm Leah Atkinson Brand and I live at 3175 Roxburg Drive, which is just up the street from Bravington Way. And I did not prepare this, but I agree with what is said here. Janice Cabin has had to leave and she called me a little while ago and asked me if I'd read it. And I agree with it. The conditional use permit allowing a short term rental at 786 Bravington Way should be denied. We object to having another short term, why do we object to having a short term rental in the neighborhood? Neighbors, Stonewall Facebook speakers, the Stonewall Community Association Board and just about anyone you ask who resides in Stonewall do not want this. because I think you will issue a conditional use permit, I ask that if you pass the conditional use permit, please consider adding some needed conditions for short-term rentals. First condition, because the STR will be unhosted, please make it a requirement that the name and phone number of a close contact near this residence at 786 Bravington be supplied to any and all renters. Shane Perry states in his application that he will be out of town and wants to have renters so that they can help pay his mortgage and other expenses. The renters need to have a responsive and physically close contact with a person to handle the inevitable difficulties of tourists going into and sleeping in a rental property for the first time. Employing another Airbnb host is not adequate for a contact person. Amelia Burnett is not an onsite contact person for this property. Condition number two, rental to tourists on only 90 days of the year should be strictly enforced as that is what the owner has stated in his letter to the board. Enforcement of all types of information is a concern with all these short term rentals. We would like to request that Mr. Perry invent or purchase and publicize a mechanism to inform his neighbors which 90 days of the year he intends to rent even if it is inconvenient for him to do so. If they can forego their privacy by having strangers for neighbors, it is only fair to let them know when strangers will be at 786 Bravington. The information should also be reported to the database in charge of these short term rentals in Fayette. Section number three, parking for six cars is possible given the house has three garages, all of which would be off limits to tourists. Even so, tourists should be instructed that parking over the sidewalk is a violation of law in Lexington. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Next please. I'm Betsy Lucky. I live at 3365 Grasmere, just around the corner. The property has been rented out. It just, when we got our letter the other day, it dawned on me why people who looked like they were going to a wedding or a funeral had run up and down the sidewalk for a couple days. That's been going on for a while. This weekend was the only weekend no one's been there in a while. parking on the street. There is really, it is a wide driveway and the people have already been parking on the street. That's not a future issue. It's already happening. And we just want to make a plea to keep our neighborhoods neighborhoods and not investorhoods. We don't want to, we get one and that, then you get another, you get another, you get another. But we want to keep it a neighborhood where we have neighbors and not investors. Thank you. Hi, my name is Amelia Burnett. As you guys heard, my name is one of the contacts for who might be called if something were to happen. I have multiple Airbnbs downtown and I have a neighborhood of Airbnb outside of town and I've known Shane for a number of years. This is, I'm not getting paid to work for him or anything like that. This is just me purely wanting to help him out because he's such a good person and he really just wanted somebody in the house while he was away. I've also frequented the house many times so sometimes when you maybe heard somebody in a pool that was me and I'm sorry. But Shane has kind of opened this up to help him out and help the situation out in terms of making it safe. So when he's out of town no one's breaking in and it's a safe situation. I can speak as an Airbnb owner and say, honestly, some of our guests that we've had in our Airbnbs have been more conscious of what was going on in the neighborhood than we've ever had tenants. I had a woman about a year ago who was staying in an Airbnb, and she noticed that there was a neighbor in distress, and she not only called me immediately, but she went over to help the neighbor in distress, and we were able to call 911 and get over and really help. I mean, I don't even know if the woman would have been alive. If you could, the audience could have been themselves quiet. I appreciate it. Thank you. I appreciate it. But my point is, is that while there's a lot of rhetoric about Airbnb being such a negative thing, I've only ever seen positive things with my Airbnbs and only ever seen positive things with Shane's Airbnb guests. I'm a very selective person when it comes to who we let stay, and I've advised that to Shane as well. And we talk a lot. This is the first time he's ever done this before, and I've been doing it for a number of years. So he uses me as a soundboard for some things. and obviously we want to keep Lexington beautiful and keep Lexington alive and we would never want anybody to be in a community that wasn't dependable and trustworthy. So I just hope whenever you guys talk about it and think about it you know you kind of consider all the pros and the great things about Airbnb as well. And it looks like our last speaker come on up please. I'm Kim Justice. I have not been sworn in. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, Ms. Justice. Proceed. So I'm Kim Justice. I'm president of the Stonewall Community Association. I want to thank everyone who's come out today to speak on this behalf. It's all very important to everyone. I'm not going to reiterate what I was going to speak because everyone has pretty much already mentioned it. I know it's been a long day for everyone. I do just want to reiterate Mr. Johnson's point about the basement being blocked off and the emergency escapes. And if there was a fire that broke out, has that been taken into consideration? really the main point I want to ask is it has been brought to my attention and it's been my understanding that this may not be Mr. Perry's primary residence. And I would like an answer to that. I thank you for your consideration. And I request the conditional use permit not be passed for 786 Bravington. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. I have a feeling there's going to be several questions for Mr. Perry, but in the meantime, is there anything staff wants to add before we go and have Mr. Perry come back up? Yeah, I have a few items that I can address. First, there were some discussions about the applicant already hosting, and we did receive notice that he did have a live listing on Airbnb and that he was hosting. So we did contact him on May 22nd regarding that listing, letting him know that he shouldn't be operating while he's going through this process because he doesn't have approval. At that time, he let us know that the calendar was blocked off and that he was not accepting any reservations. We suggested that based on what revenue typically, their typical guidance is sort of that you should include on the listing that it's only for stays 30 days or longer or take the listing down. At that point, the applicant indicated that he was taking the listing down. On May 28th, we received a call from a neighbor that the sign was not in place, and our staff did go out and replace that sign. So just kind of addressing those two items. And then regarding some of the life safety issues, so as you know, the Board of Adjustment process is sort of the first step in a two-part approval process. To be fully licensed, you have to have your planning approval, and then you have to get the license from the Division of Revenue. Revenue is regulated by Article 13 of the Code of Ordinances. and that section gets into the duties of a licensee and I just want to read a few things out of here that I think will help folks understand the the life safety aspects a little bit better that this board may not be reviewing those in as great a detail but revenue really is so every short-term rental that is owned by the licensee must meet and comply with the following contain sufficient smoke detectors contain one carbon monoxide detector at least one at least At least one fire extinguisher, at least one operable emergency and rescue opening in every sleeping room as set forth in the Kentucky Residential Code. They do also have to post the name, number, and address, and email address of the licensee or the operator, as well as an emergency contact. And that emergency contact has to be someone who is located within 25 miles of the subject property. And then they also have to post things like the emergency and non-emergency telephone numbers, trash and recycling pickup information, a clearly marked emergency evacuation plan for the premises showing exit routes, exits, and fire extinguisher locations. And a few other things, the maximum number of occupants, the copy of the conditional use permit, and the website for LFUCG so that a guest can file a complaint. And then right now we're kind of in a, I don't want to call it gray area, but we have a number of short-term rentals in this community that have operated prior to the cutoff date. And we have other ones that are starting short-term rentals against the rules. And as you find those, you send out compliance letters and you tell them if they want to continue, they need to come to us. Right, that's correct. So it's not abnormal for somebody to have done this before they came to us. But either way. Right. As I mentioned earlier, our first goal is always compliance. So if we find that someone is doing something without the appropriate licenses, we give them a chance to go through the appropriate process. Okay. Thank you. So with that, any questions for staff from any of my commissioners? All right. Hearing none, Mr. Perry, come on up. I'm sure we've got people who want to ask you questions. All right. So who wants to go first? There was a question about your primary residence. Yes, this is my primary residence. I live here. I don't have residence anywhere else. Thank you. I have a son that goes to school full-time here. I have my main business is here in Lexington. I own Triple Crown Auto Glass on Palumbo Drive. Thank you. Have you rented this before? How many times? Yes, I think it's been five times, and I found out about the law actually through Amelia and then got a compliance letter the week I started the process and shut everything down immediately. I did not know that. To my knowledge, this is brand new and Lexington has just started this year. And so ever since then, we started taking the proper steps of doing it legally. Which everything is legal, I guess now it's just different in Lexington. So what were the dates on the five times? I would have to pull it up. I'd have to ballpark, but it would have been the first time would have been maybe the beginning of the year. It would have been around that time. So I don't understand what kind of license did you have at that point? I didn't know there was a license. There was no, like when you go to sign up on Airbnb, it doesn't say anything about it. And then when I filed taxes through my accounting firm, there was no mention of it either. I just had to make sure that any income was filed. But I also did, I ran, I have a separate enterprise that I ran the Airbnb through, so it would be under a business license. That's just what I was advised to do by CPA. And then once I found out about the code, we had started the application, then received a letter, and apparently we're dealing with revenue and compliance now. But these were unhosted, or you were there? These were all unhosted, yes. Unhosted? Yes. And all of my neighbors that live directly attached to the home are all as well willing to put their name and number up as a contact if I am out of town to take care of any problems or anything that could pop up. None of them are against this at all. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Would you address the parking? in the garage so the parking and the rv looks to give an rv parks in the driveway i do not have an rv parked in the driveway somebody else had a part rv parked in the driveway at some point visits on google maps no no i i don't i moved it uh trying to be a good neighbor because i heard somebody say i was an investor not a neighbor i am a neighbor and i had i had um where i was keeping an rv it's recently gone it's recently been so but when i was keeping it i kept it at the house for maybe less than a month until i found proper storage for it but but that just goes to show how big the driveway is and you can have an rv not obstructing anything and there still was both front two garage doors were there and you could still park four cars there easily and on the on the access to the home i know the front door was brought up as the only access if you've never been in my home, I guess you wouldn't know, but when you park in the driveway, there is a back path that walks right up the back deck into the home as well. And so that's what I would suggest in the Airbnb app. You can tell people how to get in and get out, and it does say on there, no parking at all on the road. You must park in the driveway. Any additional questions? I need to refresh your autumn. Tell me how many days hosted is. I'm trying to remember these numbers by heart, but we don't really see hosted stuff. Sure. So hosted involves the applicant staying on the property during the time that it is rented out. So the primary residence is defined and the individual has to live there 265, I believe, 75, 275 days out of the year. So that's where that 90 comes from. It's kind of what's left over in the year. So in order for it to be his primary residence, he does have to live there 275 days per year. If he was staying there, then this would not even be a... Right. If he were there during the rental period, this would not be before you. It would be allowable by right. All right. Thank you. Okay, you want to have a seat? All right. I'll bring it back to the board for any comments, discussions. Mr. Chair, I just want to say that I'm always concerned about the concerns that you have. you might imagine that we never get representations from a neighborhood that wants an SRV in their neighborhood, a short-term rental in their neighborhood. And I understand that completely. I would feel the same about my neighborhood. What we need to do is be sure that we're following the law as it has been passed. And I don't see anything in the request for an SDR that prevents me from voting for it. Even though I understand your concerns, and I say again that these are exactly the same concerns that we hear legitimately from the neighborhoods that come here and tell us they don't want an SDR, short-term rental, in their neighborhood. And again, I'll say I certainly understand that. And I think that's most appropriate for you folks to be here, and I appreciate that very much. Thank you. Any other comments? Okay. Oh, yes. Go ahead, Ms. Plumlee. Thank you, Mr. Chair. With all due respect to my colleague, yes, we do hear the same concerns regarding short-term rentals again and again, but that does not mean they are any less important. The traffic issues are important and other issues that neighbors bring up when they come before us in addressing an application. So I never take lightly any neighborhood concerns, and they should be listened, and we should address those. the traffic and the issues that the neighbors brought to our attention need to be addressed, and I would like to consult with legal. Ms. Plumlee wants to make a motion to disapprove. Does anyone want to make a motion to approve? Okay. And we'll try it this way one more time, Ms. Plumlee, and we'll see how it goes. All right. Mr. J. I move to approve PLMBOA 24-77 Christian Perry's request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a single-family residential zone on property located at 786 Bravington Way, based on staff's recommendations and subject to the six conditions. Thank you, Mr. Walker. Mr. Clark seconds. Any comments? Seeing none, I'll call the question. Your application has been approved. Good luck with your project. Thank you. At this point, we're getting towards the end of the item. One thing that came up while you were absent, Tracy, even though you may have been watching it from wherever you were, was the question on whether or not we should have copies and let applicants know of opposition letters at the beginning so they can look at those in case anyone wants to bring up questions or they can address those. So something we could look at potentially. I don't want to overstep my interim chair powers today, but if we want to maybe bring that up with the chairperson Carter when she returns. Any other items for the board? So, Mr. Chair, there is a resident here who would like to speak on a conditional use that was approved a few years ago. If you would like to recognize Ms. Cano, you can do that and she can speak on the matter. I can provide additional context as needed. Oh, sorry, could you go real fast? Sorry. Slow down and repeat that for me because I've already checked out. So I'll uncheck myself. Sure. So we have a concerned neighbor regarding a conditional use permit that was approved several years ago. This is the greenhouse at 7524 Old Richmond Road. Some of you are more familiar with it than others. There's a pretty long history. And Ms. Keneau would like to speak on that today. I can sort of provide more background as needed, but I think I would probably let her say her piece first and then I can answer any questions. Okay. Okay. Quick question. Sure. Any complaints, formal complaints or? So there have been several complaints made by Ms. Cano, and Building Inspection has a meeting scheduled with her on Wednesday morning to discuss those. They have not found the site to be out of compliance. I guess I can provide a little bit more context. The applicant for whom the conditional use was approved most recently back in 2020, they have since sold the property and a new individual has purchased that just within the past few months. So they are not currently operating a business there, but they are on the property from time to time, maintaining the greenhouse and doing other things. I'm not sure exactly what all has been going on there, but Building Inspection has been investigating that. so the conditional use does still apply there was not a null and void condition related ownership or anything like that so if this individual who has purchased the property plans to continue to operate under that approved conditional use permit they can do that if they are proposing a different business model that does not line up with what was approved previously they may need to come back to you all for either another conditional use for a plant nursery that was what was approved previously or for a different conditional use that may be allowed in the AR zone depending, again, upon what their proposed business model is. I've had a couple of conversations with that individual. At the time, it was when he was first purchasing the property, and he didn't really have his business model outlined, so I shared with him the history of the project and the conditions of approval and the conditional use permit that he is subject to currently. I've not heard anything from him since then, so that's kind of where we are with it. So there is an active investigation ongoing, but building inspection has not found any issues to date. And real quickly, so there will be a meeting with building inspection. And they will make a final determination. And if the final determination is there is no violation, Dr. Gonneau can then appeal that to us to be heard. Is that how it would work? Well, I'd like to get a little bit of background just real quick, just so I can know how much we need you to say. I've been here like 20 times. Oh, I know. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I do have some things to ask. Sure. But so if the Division of Building Inspection finds that there is no violation, I believe that that would be something that could be appealed to you all. Okay. If they do find that there's a violation, again, of course, they would be given the opportunity to come into compliance or to apply to modify the conditional use or for a new conditional use or whatever was necessary. If they find that it's not in compliance and the applicant or the new property owner is not willing to do that and they want to do something completely different, but they're not willing to go through the process or something like that, building inspection could report that to you all and you all could opt to hold a revocation hearing to revoke the conditional use. But again, that would probably not be the first step. Most likely it would be that we would give the owner the opportunity to come into compliance or to apply for the appropriate approvals. Okay. And the reason I was asking about this is because there will be a potential formal opportunity for this to come before this board. And today, Dr. Gonneau has asked for a few minutes to give us an informal. That's right. There's no action that you can take today. There's nothing before you. Perfect. You're just listening to a concerned citizen. All right. And Dr. Gonneau, if you could come up, we'll give you five minutes. Okay. to give us an update on everything? Sure. Thank you. Dr. Lisa Gonneau, 7525 Old Richmond Road. And I'm here because I do think this needs to be placed on the July agenda. Even though I'm meeting with building inspection on Wednesday, there seems to be a disagreement of the minds. So I'm here to request that the property at 7524 Old Richmond Road be placed on the July agenda to discuss revocation of a conditional use permit. This property has a long history and continues to have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. In 2006, it received a conditional use as a commercial greenhouse, which was never commenced, and that was revoked in 2019 after the owner tried several attempts to rent or unload the property for things outside the zoning ordinance. In 2020, it received a new conditional use as a plant nursery, even though a 6,500 square foot greenhouse is the principal structure on 1.46 acres. And once again, the owner talked a good game about a beautiful property to come, which did not materialize. In March 2024, this property was once again sold at auction. Activity has occurred on the property, an illegal entrance is being used, and equipment is being stored on site. So while the rest of you were having a great Memorial Day, I woke to two flatbed trucks on site, several other vehicles, several people, a backhoe, and work commenced all day, and There's no application or he was moving dirt and nobody seemed to know what was going on over there. The illegal entrance has been a problem always. It's not paved. It's supposed to be where there's a plant nursery, but because the vehicles are so big, they all drive down to the slope of the property and exit on the state highway. This property is in an AR zone, not a business zone, which should have five continuous acres They used for agricultural purposes. This property will never properly meet requirements for many reasons. I've been here between 15 and 20 times regarding this property and I'm seeking permanent relief. I've been in constant contact with planning and building inspection, but they're failing to report violations or notify you all of the lack of not meeting the conditions. So yeah, they have talked to him. They've given him all the notes and he's not filing an application, but what he is doing is storing equipment on the site and that's not allowed in AR zone. So I personally have taken pictures which I have sent these guys showing that there are multiple trailers inside that greenhouse. It is not a storage site. There is no parking lot and currently still from Memorial Day we still have a back hoe on site and you know we've gone round and round about that and it is there overnight and I've taken pictures of it sitting there at night. So yes, I'm the person who's seeing this daily so I know what's going on over there. I certainly hope you will hear a full report in July and add this to your agenda. As I live right across the street, over time I have, number one, had my safety in jeopardy because of this situation, been accused of breaking into the greenhouse in a public forum by counsel of the past owner, I've been told that if I caused a business to falter in the AR zone, a business, right, in an AR zone, that goes against what the AR zone is about, that the owner would put a pick farm across from me. And that happened in this very room here. I had my photo taken in my front yard multiple times. Ms. Ginnick, can I stop you for just a minute? I don't personally feel comfortable doing this. I'm going to go ahead and step out because the applicant or the other person doesn't have any opportunity to defend themselves on this. I'm just asking. I'm giving you a history of what I see, and I'm allowed to do that. I understand, but the person, nobody's here to defend. Well, if you put it on the July agenda, we can talk about it. We don't set the agenda. This is a quasi-judicial board, and me personally, I'm going to step out because I don't feel that this is correct. Okay. I've been placed on YouTube while on my front porch, and I've had to call the state police. I've interacted with a never-operating sod business, a lawn care service, a landscaping company, a fish tank business, and now an excavation and concrete business, which is who bought it in March. Excavation and concrete. So none are agriculture and farming pursuits. So please hear this in July. Thank you, Dr. Gonneau. Real quickly from the staff, and I cannot recall. It's been a while. So the process would go bottom. The meeting with building inspection, and you and building inspection will make a final determination on whether they are in compliance with the conditional use permit. Zoning enforcement staff will make that call. Yes. Okay. Sorry. All right. They're housed within building inspection now. Okay. Gotcha. And then at that point, that could be appealed one way or the other. Either party could appeal it to us. Right. At this point, we don't have a decision that's appealed. A final decision to even be appealed. Okay. And then once that is appealed, Dr. Gonneau, at that hearing, if she was the aggrieved party from the decision, could at that point appeal it to us, and we could address that and also discuss revocation at that time. That's right. So a citizen can appeal a decision of building inspection or planning in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. So a conditional use is something that comes out of the zoning ordinance. So that is something that is appealable. And again, the other way that this could come back is if building inspection finds that the activity is not in line with the current conditional use. So realistically, though, given filing deadlines, the earliest this would be heard would be in August. The earliest, yes. Yes. So, Dr. Gano, the earliest, just because of the way the procedures work, would be, presumably we will get a determination this coming month. And then you could then, if you are aggrieved and you don't agree with it, you could appeal that, but it would not be heard until August. Okay. Another point that needs to be made. I have emails that went to my council person, Kathy Plumman, that says this property has been shown twice to not have met those conditions that are on there currently. And so that should come back and be reported to you. The conditions haven't been met in two years. It should have been done within one year, and that hasn't happened. And all of that will be addressed by the zoning compliance, and they will then give us a – I would ask, even though I'm only interim chair, if staff could give us an update at the end of next month's hearing during the staff time and let us know how it is progressing. And once again, if you feel aggrieved, and when I use the term aggrieved, oh, I know that. But when you feel legally aggrieved underneath the ordinance, then presumably August would be the earliest that we would hear this, just because we've got to follow the procedures in this ordinance and give the other side due process to be before us. So we're not pushing you off. But I think August is, practically speaking, the earliest we can hear an actual case on this matter. I just think you all need to know. There's stuff going on and nobody's doing anything. I appreciate that. So we will have an update next month from the staff on where things go. And at this point, I will move on to board items. Anyone else? Board items? Staff, anything from you guys? I want to appreciate staff for doing the work session. I had to leave out early. Did we decide to make it a quarterly, annually, hopefully not monthly thing? not a monthly thing. We scheduled or we looked at scheduling another work session and I want to think I want to say it was in August. Okay. I think it was August 19th. August 19th. August 19th. Okay. I put that on my calendar the week after your normal meeting. Okay. I'll add that to my calendar. Thank you. So our next meeting is July 8th, 2024 at 1 30 p.m. Hopefully Ms. Carter will be back but I will say it's like riding a bike. I made it through without too many huge blunders and I'll see everyone next month. Thank you. Thank you. We'll be right back. We're gonna prove the night We're gonna go Let us grow Get you to move It's all right All right All right Let us grow Set in your shoes Let's stand up All right All right Gonna tell you What you can do With my love All right Let you know, girl, you're looking good, you're out of sight. All right, just move yourself. And you glide like a 747. And you lose yourself in the sky. Among the clouds and the heavens. Go. Let this room light up the fuse. It's all right. All right. All right, let me screw, set in the shoes, I stand up, all right, all right. Let me tell you what you can do with my love, all right. Gotta let you know, girl, you're looking good, you're outside, all right. All right, just tell the DJ to play your favorite tune. Then you know it's okay. What you found is happening now. Let this groove, know that the blues, it's all right, all right, all right. Let this groove, sing in your shoes, so stand up. Stand up, alright Let this go, get you to move It's alright, alright, alright Let this go, set in the shoes So stand up, alright, alright Give me fire, give me some eye On the floor, take a little time Come and see you, you and me Give a little sign I'll be there, after a while If you want my love, we can boogie on down. Down, boogie on down. Down, boogie on down. Down, boogie on down. On down. Let's improve tonight. Share the spice of life. Baby, slice it right. We're gonna move tonight