I'm out. We'll see you next time. 7-8 What number is this, Chip? 7-8 Okay, don't get excited, man. It's because I'm short, I know. Oh, I could hide Neat the wings Of the bluebird As she sings The six o'clock Alarm would never Ring But it rings and I rise Wipe the sleep out of my eyes With shaven razors cold and it stings Cheer up sleepy G Oh what can it mean To a daydream believer And a homecoming queen You once thought of me As a white knight on his steed Now you know how happy I can be Oh, and a good time starts and ends Without a love Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, good afternoon everyone. I'm currently at 1.31 and we will call this meeting to order. the first item on the agenda is the approval of minutes we have received the board has received minutes from may 2024 you all have had time to review that i'll entertain a motion or any questions or concerns to be stated please okay so move to approve Okay, we have a first by Mr. Gross and a second by Ms. Plumlee. Any further discussion? Okay, we will open for vote. Okay. That motion has passed. The next thing I will do... The next thing I'll do is... Is that really loud? Like I've never been that loud before. It's good? Okay, we want loud. So the next thing I'll do is sound the agenda. No, I'm sorry. The next thing I will do is swear to the witnesses. So if anyone plans to speak today, I need you to stand up at this time. Okay. You've done this before. Raise your right hand. And do you swear to tell the whole truth and the entire truth today? Okay. Okay. The next item on the agenda is to actually sound the agenda. So what I will do is run through these cases and make sure that the applicant's present. If it is recommended for approval and there's no one to speak in opposition for that particular case, those cases will be heard first. If we do have opposition or if it has been recommended for disapproval, those will be on the complete heard docket and those cases will be heard next in their entirety. The first item on the docket, which actually does have a title on you all's agenda, just for the record, is PLN BOA 24-76, that's Booker Group Investments LLC. Is the applicant present? Thank you. Is there anyone here to speak for or in opposition to this? So this will be number one on the H.E.R.D. docket. the next item is p l n d l eight twenty four dash eighty two that's james baker is the applicant present this one has been recommended for approval with the slight uh... modification do we have anyone to speak in opposition is that can cop uh... comfortable with the variance allowed so you will be first on the expedited then we have plnboa 24-83 sean and tammy wilhite are the applicants present has been recommended for approval is there anyone in opposition of this item okay that should be number two on the expedited docket now on plnboa 24-84 that's madden family llc number 21 this one has been recommended for postponement the applicant was unable to attend today but they have indicated that they are agreeable to a one-month postponement and have asked staff to request that postponement on their behalf okay was there anyone here to speak on or on this particular case in that case madam chair i will move for postponement of that case from today until for one month which will be our august 12 2024 meeting thank you mr gross and miss tucker has offered a second any further discussion all right we will open for vote That motion has passed. The next item on the agenda is PLNBOA 24-85. That's Robert Millen, but this application has been withdrawn. And we don't need a motion for that, correct? That's correct, you don't need a motion. Thank you. The next item on the list is PLNBOA 24-88, that's Ian Cole. Is the applicant present? Ian Cole at 114 Paris Avenue. Oh, you're there? Okay. Is there anyone to speak in opposition of this particular item? All right. I think that makes it number three on the expected. Someone will check my math. That's Chad's job. Okay. You got it. Good deal. under our conditional uses as PLN BOA 24-36, Dustin and Lauren Gage. Is the applicant present? So this one also has been recommended or has been requested to be postponed and staff has been working with them? That's correct. We've been working with the applicant and they plan to submit some additional materials ahead of the August meeting and they're requesting to postpone to August 12th. Okay. There's no opposition or concern. I'd entertain a motion. So moved. Second. Okay. And I have PLNB, oh, I'm sorry. We have to take a vote. We're still on the old vote. There we go. Motions passed. The next item on the list is PLNBOA 24-39, that's Lexington Islamic Center Incorporated. Let's see, I think this one is the applicant present today. We've also had a request to postpone this item. Make a motion to postpone that until the August meeting. Okay. We have a... Sounds good. I think I'm getting sick in August. You hear that? Good to. good too okay that item has been postponed until august 12th meeting the next item is pln voa 24-73 that's francois munyak munyakazi that's correct that has been recommended for approval as the applicant present there you go is there anyone here to speak in opposition of this item we do okay so that will be number two on the herd docket our next item is plnboa 24-79 that's diane james is the applicant present yeah this has been recommended for approval is there anyone to speak in opposition of this item okay so this is a short-term rental we will group these together here shortly okay thank you so we'll call that number one str docket can i rename it that way that would be number two on the str docket the the last one also was an str okay that's chad's fault there we go thank you And then we have PLN BOA 24-80 Innocent Gama. Is applicant present? Thank you. Is there anyone here to speak in opposition of this item? We do have one. Okay. So I believe that'll be number two on the herd, on the regular herd. And lastly, we have PLNBOA 24-87, that's Clay's Mill Road Baptist Church Board of Trustees. The applicant is present. This has been recommended for approval. Is there any opposition today? Okay. So, thank you. Okay, so you will be heard. Looks like that's number three. All right. So we will go back to the first expedited item. That's PLN BOA 24-82. Mr. James Baker, if you'd like to come forward, please. Good afternoon. Please state your name for the record. Rory Kaley with EA Partners here on behalf of the property owner. We have read the conditions expressed by staff and are in support of those and would request your approval. Wonderful. The board has had an opportunity to review the items. Do we have any questions of the applicant? No? If not, I will entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I hereby move for approval of PLN BOA 24-82 James Baker's request for a variance to reduce the required side yard setback from 25 feet to 3 feet to construct a dwelling unit on each of the reference properties in the planned neighborhood residential zone on properties at 753 Lucille Drive, 2731 and 2738 Rockaway Place and 2556 Springleaf Courts. with us having approval of a lesser variance to 7.5 for the fourth lot set forth in the reasons in the staff report and subject to the conditions in the report. Thank you. I think so. Yep. The fourth lot is the 2556 Springleaf Court. All right. Do we have a second? I second. Okay, thank you, Mr. Sturdivant. We have a first and a second. If there's no further questions or discussion, we'll vote. Wonderful. Motion is passed. Good luck with the project. Thank you. All right. Our next item is PLNBOA 24-83. That's Sean and Tammy Wilhite. if the applicant or representation would like to come forward. Good afternoon. Bruce Simpson on behalf of the Well Heights. We're in agreement with the staff recommendation and request your approval. Thank you. So that has been recommended for approval. There were three conditions that have been listed, and we're saying we're comfortable with those. Okay. Do we have any questions of the applicant or any concerns? Is there like to another street that kind of comes in on the side of that? So you kind of almost have to look three ways instead of two ways. Excuse me, ma'am. Is there another street that kind of comes in on the side of that as well? So it kind of comes around like this and then there's another road right here. Yes, ma'am. Kearney Creek Lane, we're like a horseshoe. Yes. And we're at the end of the horseshoe on the left-hand side, and we have another small branch street that connects in front of our house that goes in another horseshoe that's in front of our house. Yes, ma'am. Well, be careful using that driveway. Yes, ma'am. I will. Yes, ma'am. Because you have to look several directions. I'll make sure any time I'm backing up, I'll beat my horn and look twice, ma'am. All heard. There we go. Not after 10. Good deal. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Are there any other questions of the applicant? If not, I will entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I hereby move for approval of PLM BOA 2483. Sean and Tammy Will Heights request for a variance to reduce the front yard setback in order to construct a new detached garage from 20 feet to 16 feet in a planned neighborhood residential zone at 2652 Kearney Creek Lane based upon the staff's report and subject to the conditions in that report. Thank you. Do I have a second? Thank you, Mr. Walker. We will take a vote. Motion's passed, good luck with your project. Thank you very much. All of you all. All right, the next item on the agenda is PLNBOA 24-88, that was Ian Cole. Good afternoon. I'm Krista Joint. I'm Ian Cole's real estate agent, and he was not able to be in town today requesting variance on the width of his driveway from 10 foot to 12 and a half feet. Okay, thank you. And this has been recommended for approval, and there are two conditions listed. Have you had, as the client, had the opportunity to review the conditions? I am not sure. I believe he has. Okay. Have we heard from the applicant or do you have the authority to bind them to the conditions? Yeah. Yes, he has seen those conditions. Okay. Thank you. Do we have any questions on this application? I can make a motion for approval. Thank you. Motion to approve PLNBOA 24-80. Innocent, request a conditional use permit to establish a type 2 child care. No, no, I'm sorry. This PLNBOA 24-88, Ian Cole. 24-088. Mr. Schuttevant, can you make sure your microphone is on, please? on please. I had the wrong one in front of me. Hold on one second. And then Bob, turn your mic on. It is. Okay. Oh, there you go. Okay. Sorry. Wrong number. Keep in trouble. PLN BOA 24-88 in Cole. Request a variance to increase the allowable width of the driveway from 10 to 12 feet within a defined infill redevelopment area in a single family residential R1C zone on property located at 114 Paris Avenue. Based on recommendation of the staff and approval of the attached two conditions. Okay. And Ms. Plumlee has seconded that item. No further discussion. We'll take a vote. Thank you. The motion is passed. Thank you. Thank you. the next item should be plnboa 24-87 clays mill road baptist church board of trustees the applicant will please come forward is that one of her okay okay thank you and it's our last heard kate's some nice actually okay let's go back to the front here we go number one plnboa 24-76 booker group investments if the applicant will come forward please you did okay okay hello my name's herbie booker with booker group investments um i'm asking for a front yard branch of 10 feet and a backyard variance of seven feet i think i know the the case started last month so i had to bring myself up to speed on it uh did you make some modifications to the site plan since then or no what i've done was um i got so on our side of the street there's six neighbors so i got three of the neighbors in the green with me being able to deal with it okay and then one of the properties the other property adjacent property is your own yes okay okay do we have any questions at the applicant before i allow for public comment what was there i remember last time we were going to continue this but what was the alteration was there any difference from the last uh okay same thing yes and that's what i understood it was just an opportunity to talk to the neighbors i saw that mostly okay all right if you'll have a seat and we'll allow public comment saw someone was here to speak please Members of the Board and Planning staff, my name is Steve Kaye. I live at 250 Campsie Place, which is at the corner of Campsie Place and Campsie Court. I appreciate your allowing me to speak again on this proposal. You have in the record of last month's hearing my remarks and accompanying set of photos of the houses on both Campsie Place and Campsie Court. Taken together, the photos show that in the immediate neighborhood, the setbacks of those houses are entirely consistent. In addition, one of the photos shows the subject property, which is a vacant lot, and the edge of the adjacent building to its north, which is on the corner of Camp C, Court, and Fourth Streets. Even though it is on one side of the subject property, I suggest it is inappropriate to consider that setback at all when determining the appropriate front yard setback for the subject property. House that fronts on 4th Street, what you see is a side yard setback, not a front yard setback. The proposal requests a front yard setback to reduction from 30 feet to 10 feet. I believe I illustrated last month the reasons why a 10 foot setback is inappropriate. It would be the only outlier on Camp C Court and inconsistent with the houses on Camp C Place. Last month, I suggested that the variance be to 17 feet instead of 10 feet. While not aligning the front edge of the proposed building with the front edge of other Camp C Court houses, and deviating from the setbacks on Camp C Place, That would at least put the front edge of the building roughly in line with the front edges of the porches in the neighborhood. And would still allow for the lot to be buildable. Last month, this board voted to continue this hearing and suggested that Mr. Booker contact neighbors to discuss possible modifications to his plan. He has not contacted me or Mr. Lutz, who was here last month as an objector. And Mr. Lutz regrets that he's unable to be here today. I have in my remarks, as far as I know, Mr. Booker has not contacted neighbors about his plan. I gather that he has contacted some neighbors. I'm not aware of that. I ask that you reject this proposal because a 10 foot front yard setback is incompatible with all the other houses on Camp C Court and Camp C Place. I appreciate your consideration. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. And if the applicant will come. All right, to address the issue of the setbacks, actually, Kempsey Place, the average setback on that whole street, including Mr. K's house, is 10 feet. So if we're keeping a uniform with the neighborhood, most of the houses on Kempsey Place does have a 10-foot setback. So when we ask him for the variance of on Kempsey Court, there's maybe a couple of houses. The average setback is 17, but the neighbors that's directly affecting are in agreement with me going forward with the bill. And then I guess the people from last month, the only issue they had was the water runoff. They didn't have a problem with the setback of the property. It was about a water runoff, and we addressed that last month. And you had an opportunity to review the conditions there as well? Mm-hmm. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Do we have any other comments? I had reviewed this one just because I wasn't here, but it seems to be within the allowable and seemed to be within the infill and redevelopment with the goals of planning and adding additional densities. So I felt like I may have missed something just a little bit. Am I? Were there other? concerns you guys like to express the the initial concern was that the continuity on there's two campsy places there's the l that goes up to fourth and there's the l that goes up to north martin luther king and i think that was the the prior concern was the setback uh sort of continuing to continuity if i remember right um but you're saying that the other l of camp c is actually closer to the street than your l of camp c yeah it is a it's an average to 10 feet. Okay. Yeah, that was pretty much it. Okay. Okay. And it is a unique lot. I know we're trying to build on what we have. Do we have any other questions? If not, I'll entertain a motion. comments concerns okay i'll entertain a motion i read the state last time so you can but you feel better now I'll make a motion to approve. Thank you. All right, we have a motion to approve the variance as requested with the conditions as listed. Do we have a second? Do we need further discussion? Should we pause and have further discussion? The motion failed. Okay. Do we need additional information? Would you like to put the site plan back up and take us through it again a little bit? I don't know what we need. I guess in my opinion, this is one of those that it's always tricky because you have to meet special circumstances of why. Right. And, yeah, it seems like you've met with some neighbors, not all. There's no question that this does not line up continuity with your portion of campus. You know what I mean? Like you're in that lineage. And so that's kind of where I'm getting stuck because there's not necessarily a special condition necessarily other than, like Raquel mentioned, is that it really does assist with infill. But, you know, you're still only talking an extra 100, 200 feet. So, I don't know. I'm kind of on the fence on this one, like I said, because I picked on you last time. I'm sort of riding the fence. And as you look at it right there, the rest of the house is right here on County Court. LFUGC built a house years ago that took half of this backyard right there. So, that's why I'm cut a little short, then different to the backyard variance. So, that's why I'm needing the variance. Because when they built the house right beside it, they took part of that backyard right there. So the rest of them run as far back as the house next door. So we was left with a smaller lot. And I have a question. So the proposed setback, it's halfway in between the neighbor that's existing and that corner house? Is that where we're sitting? So we got on the corner house, it's a five foot setback, and then the next house is a 17. So we was asking for a variance of 10 to meet it in the half. And then the rest of the house, like I said, on the Kelsey Place, every house owner is 10 feet, some of them are less. Just not the two right beside it? Just not the two right beside it. So we're really going up and back? Right. Okay. And that's a shorter lot than the other ones? And then most of the neighbors on this side, it's only six houses, two of them are abandoned. The other neighbors are in green. It's with it. Now I'm watching Ms. Tucker, she's thinking. Any questions? Anything? I would just like to see, you know, it work out with the neighbors and make it look a little bit more in continuity, I guess, with the other homes that are right there. So we feel more comfortable with the lesser variance of the setback? Are we talking about the 17? Let me see what the number is. So we've requested from 30 to 10. The 17 won't allow enough space to build? Correct. It would take, I think, almost 400 or 500 square feet off of the building. And the building itself was just, how large was it? It was, it came out to be 2,300 square feet, like 2,300. The bottom was like 900. Yeah, we're going up. We're going up with it. Okay. Yeah, so we're going up with it. So we are already limited with the space with that lot. We were just trying to meet the infield development. The board approved it. I mean, staff approved. Recommended approved. Yeah. So if we take any more square footage off of it, it's going to be hard to even, I don't know if it would be even worth building there. Yes, please. Thank you. I am kind of remembering last month when there was a neighbor whose concern was the water. Yes, ma'am. I know we have engineers have addressed that and all, but any time I can hear that question, that's kind of my concern now is about the direction. Ms. Plumlee, can you speak directly into your microphone? Your mic, pull the mic. Last time, there was previously a house there before. So this is not like we just, I guess they tore the house down years ago. So all the water runoffs in the sewer was done when they developed the street in that neighborhood. Thank you for that comment. Does this have the same blueprint as the house there before? It's got a... Footprint? Well, the bottom, the foundational area that you're using. Yeah. And the neighbor that, I guess, that last time Mr. Jeff, they had just built a garage there. So, you know, the water runoff would be coming from a couple new things that's been added over there. But I'm sure that's already been added in. Do you know the footprint of the prior house? What size house had been there before? I don't. I don't think they have it on record. It's been so long ago. Okay. Okay. Well, I will open for a motion again. I'll just state again that it just seems to be aligned with, you know, directionally what we're trying to do with trying to increase density with using our infill. It seems to be allowable. There is the variance in the setbacks there. So the average is great. I mean, we would all like things to look a certain way, but at the same time, you can line it with the house in front, the house in back. And I read pretty clearly that the look of the house should be staying consistent with it, the balcony on the front and the back to have the same feel. Correct. But with that, if we'll have a motion, I'll entertain a motion at this time. And I'm glad to follow the direction of the board. I don't want to hold up. But fundamentally, nothing's changed from last time, and that's why I've got to stick my guns. It's not that I don't want you to pass today, but I won't be the one to head that direction. So, you know, I'll follow you guys. Yeah, I know in the past at the last meeting, they was asking me to speak with neighbors, and I spoke with a few neighbors, and they signed the paper that it was okay with. Chair, I wanted to point out, since we do have a request for three variances, as I think you may have been hinting at, you could do an approval for a lesser variance or do disapproval, but either one might require a brief recess. Okay, thank you. So there's a variance for the front yard, side yard, and rear yard. Okay. Okay. Back to... He had to say he won't fight you, but he doesn't want to say it. See, they get a little intimidated. They thought you were going to fight you. A big guy. Look at that. Look at that. Is the original motion still on the floor? Yes. Oh, no, you'd have to make the motion again. It died because we didn't have a second, but if you'd like to make it again, it sounds like we may have some agreement. to make a motion for approval, PLNBOA 24-76, Booker Group Investments, LLC, request a variance to reduce the required front yard setback from 30 feet to 10 feet. Number two, a variance to reduce the required side yard setback from 6 feet to 5 feet. And three, a variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from 10 feet to 7 feet in order to construct a new two-family dwelling within the defined infill and redevelopment area and a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone on property located at 348 Camp C Court. Based on recommendation of staff and subject to the three conditions. Perfect. Thank you Bob. Do we have a second? Ms. Plumlee has offered a second and no further discussion we'll open for vote thank you the motion is passed good luck with your project all right thank you we'll let brandon come back no i'll entertain a motion whether or not we will allow brandon to come back into the let's see that's one heard oh um plnboa 24-80 innocent gamma Good afternoon. Please state your name for the record. My name is Innocent Gamma. Thank you. So staff has recommended approval for your conditional use to continue the child care in your home. Has the board had an opportunity to review? Are there any questions? Okay. Ms. Plumlee. Thank you, Chair. I noticed in your justification in your letter in your application that you were going to limit the time outdoors because it might bother the neighbors. And I'm not a child care expert, but I do know there are studies that suggest that kids need to be outdoors a lot more than they are. So I would suggest that once you build your fence, that you have the children outdoors more. And my other question, I think that house has many stairs. How do the children handle it? Do you go down those stairs and up those stairs, and how old are the children? We have gates that we use to block the stairs with, And our kids range from the age of our youngest kid just turned one. And that's the youngest. Mr. Gamma, can you speak a little bit closer into the microphone, please? Thank you. We have kids ranging from the ages of one year to five years old. And our youngest kid is a kid that just turned one year. And regarding the staircases you talked about, we have gates that we use to make sure that we block kids from going up. and down the stairs. Thank you. Mr. Tucker. I had a question, I'm sorry, I got loud, about the outside too. It looked like the backyard goes straight down. Now, I didn't go back there and look at that. I could just kind of view from the street and kind of from the side. Do you have a pretty good amount of property there to allow the children to play on that's fairly flat or does it all slope? Sorry, say it again, I didn't hear you. You want to be slower. I speak with an accent so I'll probably have to listen with an accent. Okay. The backyard, is it all sloped? Does it all go down or is it flat? It's a light slope. It's not a very brutal slope. It's just a smooth and gentle slope that has a, I think it's a council line at the very end of it, which serves as a fence, kind of a fence, not really a fence, but some wires that have been aligned back there by the council. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions of the applicant before I allow public comment? I'd like to follow up on that question. It says type 2 child care center is required to have a minimum 300 square foot outdoor play area that's fenced. Will that be 300 feet relatively level? Yeah, I think that probably has a dimension, yes. Thank you. Thank you. If you could take a seat for a moment, we'll allow some public comment. Thank you. I think there was someone here to speak. Please. MY NAME IS JIM BAKER. I'M THE DEVELOPER OF THAT STREET THERE AS WELL AS THE LOT THAT HE'S PLANNING TO TRY TO GET A DAY CARE ON. THE BACKYARD IS VERY SMALL. THE HOUSE I BELIEVE IS A TWO STORY WITH A WALKOUT BASEMENT. THERE'S NO TURN AROUND AT THE END OF THE STREET. I've been told that they can have up to 12 people in the house, which is way too many people for any single-family home, in my opinion. It'll create increased traffic. This street is now a stubbed street. There is a school plan to go at the end of that street. The school has not divulged whether or not that street will continue on into their property as far as access for buses. I don't know that they know yet. The school won't be built for a number of years. If you approve this, I would ask that you approve it and base an age limit on the type of people that will be there, because it can turn into a halfway house, a daycare for adults, and who knows what else. I think the daycare on that street is which is surrounded by single-family homes, and to have a daycare there is not appropriate. I own the property directly across the street from this house and I own a house two doors down from that house. I do not live on that street, but I did develop the street. And let's see what else I have. There is a daycare that was built as a daycare approximately three miles away on Greendale and Sandersville Road. And this infringes on their business, I think, for people to set up their own private little daycares in their own home. and the daycare that's is about three miles away right on greendale road in sandersville was built as a daycare and professionally run as a daycare i had a grandchild that attended that daycare and there's really no need for another daycare in my opinion so if you do approve this please limit the age group of the children. And like I said again, to have 12 people in one single family home is not appropriate at any time. That's my opinion. Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment? Mr. Gamma? Thank you. Opportunity to respond please. Yeah, our daycare is not a new daycare. We have had a daycare approved and certified since January. And we have never had any complaints whatsoever from any neighbor about our daycare. Also, our street has no traffic, no traffic whatsoever. The street down, down, down, a little bit far away from us has traffic. And that traffic is not caused by our daycare. And before you even reach our property, there is another branch that goes into other streets. So it is not like to say every vehicle that comes into that neighborhood comes through our street. No, they don't. So also to insinuate that to have to have people and you don't know what will come who, I mean, to me, that is a very disrespectful statement towards us to say you don't know what will come. We are not just some kind of random people. We follow the law when we want to do something. We go ahead and go through all the steps that are required. And so we have not skipped any step. And if we are applying for a type 2 daycare, it's to be able to add three more kids whose parents are begging for space at our daycare. And that is it. And just for, I'm sorry. No, that was me. Just for clarification, you're currently operating, based on your allowed use up to seven. Yes. And then to go over seven, we're required to do a conditional use. Have to, and we don't plan to be there forever. This is just building something that we're going to have to leave in a couple of months and find a facility outside a home where we are going to start a full on daycare. Okay. And have you had an opportunity to review the conditions that were listed? there are seven conditions that have been listed and approval can we make sure he sees this i don't have it in front of me but i think they have some of those conditions and um we have looked at all these conditions probably i'm missing something but i think we have um met most of these requirements that's why we're here today sounds good any further questions of the applicant if not i will entertain a motion okay okay um i'm not going to make the motion right now i will make some comments okay if i may and i think there is a very much need for daycare in lexington and miss plumley can you speak more directly into your microphone we're having a little bit of a hard time today it might sit so uh... it at the red lights on i should and you just pull it down okay repeat uh... lexington is very much in need of daycare centers and but what concerns me about this you already have a business there the comments by uh... the neighbor kind of gives me red light feeling that maybe this neighbor adding that many more children just might not be appropriate for the layout of the neighbor neighborhood at this time So that would be my thought at this moment. I'll move to approve this application. It looks like he currently has seven. He's moving to 10. That's only three children. It's 12, I think. Up to 12. We currently have five, actually. Yeah. And we had six previously. And since we are required to have 12, including our own kids, We have four of them, so we are only required to have up to eight unrelated kids to add to our kids. So four of them are your kids. I'm still comfortable moving to approve. So I'm going to move to approve PLN BOA 24-80 Innocent Gamas Request for a Conditional Use Permit to establish a Type 2 Child Care Center in the planned neighborhood residential zone at 2684 Rockaway Place, based upon the staff's report. and the hearing testimony you heard today and subject to the conditions set forth in that report. Thank you, Mr. Gross and Mr. Walker. I think Mr. Walker is second. Is that correct? We will entertain a vote. The motion is passed. Good luck with the daycare or child care. I'm on STRs. Clay's Mill Baptist Church. I'm so sorry, I keep moving Clay's Mill all the time. It must be your turn. PLNBOA 24-87 Clay's Mill Road Baptist Church. Thank you. Good afternoon, my name is Todd Osterloh on behalf of the applicant. Good afternoon. This has been recommended for approval, but we do have some public comment or opposition here. So if you'd like to tell us a little bit about the project first, we'd appreciate it. Yes, absolutely. Currently on Clay's Mill, they're at 3000 Clay's Mill. There is the Clay's Mill Baptist Church facility that's been there for decades. And there has been an academy there, K-12, that's been operated there for decades. What the church would like to do is requesting a conditional use permit so that it would now operate a preschool and daycare for ages 1 to 4. There would be a similar number of students we anticipate, but in terms of the magnitude of impact, we actually think there would be less. With a K-12 school, you have traffic during rigid times of the day, at 8 a.m. when it starts and at 3, 3.30 at the end, whereas with preschool and daycare, parents drop off their kids and pick them up at staggered times to where it's not that same impact there. So largely because it's a very similar use and would benefit the community, obviously, with having another preschool, that's what we're requesting. And we have seen the staff's approval requesting with three conditions. We appreciate the recommended approval and certainly would accept those conditions. Thank you. Wait, I got a quick question. Sure. I'm trying to think here. You guys built a new church out in Jasmine County? That's correct. And this is being used for? There's a church facility, a sanctuary there, as well as that's where the K-12 Academy would move to. Okay. Thank you. Other questions of the applicant prior to public comment? Okay, we'll have some public comment that will allow you to come back. We had a few people that wanted to speak. if we could come forward at this time. Okay. Because we have a few people, we will limit comments to three minutes and continue to move forward. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Can you hear me okay? Is that better? Just a funny mic thing. How about that? Just yell, reel out. The acoustics in this place, I hardly heard anything that you guys said before, just so you know. And it's really difficult to absorb the information. But I live at 3000 Neal Drive, not Clay's Mill Road. And my property backs up to the church property there. My name is Dana Horowitz. years ago, Clayson Mill Road built that facility and they made a lot of changes, a lot of changes, and now I'm subject to a lot of traffic that goes behind my house. And I don't see that this would eliminate that traffic, only probably make it worse. The fencing that they're talking about in this, well, yeah, by the way, I'm curious. I didn't get any of this in the mail, so I could even study it. So I'm at a loss presenting my stuff to you today. I just have to go wing by wing here. The fence is a six-foot fence, but when they built it, they built it inside of their property line, putting these big trees on my side of the fence. And I've been subject to maintaining and cleaning them for, you know, I guess 10, 12 years or more than that. I don't think that sounds fair. And I noticed on the new plat, is that what you call it? The trees that are there are going to be eliminated. It was really beautiful before. It was a chain link fence. They tore that down and put up the six foot fence. And now you look out my backyard and well before it would look like a nice meadow. That's gone. and now they want to put some other kind of fence maybe. I don't know. I have no idea what that's about. The traffic, the noise, oh, they store their buses on the back part of that lot. And the neighborhood before tried to fight that. It didn't happen. But I think they were eliminating some of those buses to go somewhere else, I don't know where, but they park a lot of them back there now. And anytime there's buses that are moved, there's a lot of noise and a lot of ruckus. I've had plenty of children on the other side of the fence, and apparently they are not regulated very well because they just scream and yell all day long, all week long. that's not a nice thing. If they're going to do this, then I would recommend that they remove all these big trees and replace it with a noise abatement project. I don't know what it would be, but something that's going to abate the noise. I know I have more stuff, but that's all I have for now. Thank you, sir. Good afternoon. My name is Priscilla Brooks, and I live at 3012 Neal Drive, and I would like for the plat to be put up there, if you could. Is that possible? The plat they sent to us has this plat backwards. My home backs up to Clay's Mill. It's the fifth house on the right. This plat needs to be reversed. Our houses are on this other side. Now, to make a long story short. Could you show us on this diagram where your house is i'm having trouble following this oh this thing oh where'd it go that top button with the circle on it the very top one listen right there okay It's not going to where I need to be. But that's not showing the houses. Yes. My house is the fifth house on the right. Has a pool right in the middle there. my house, their house, and Dana's house were all right there. And my review over this thing is we do not need another daycare. We have Jesse Clark, we have Montessori School, we have three daycares. They're in less than a mile, and we don't need any more traffic. The traffic on Clay's Mill just made three lanes just so we could get out of our street. And there's like three streets right there in that area. But they just changed that to three lanes so we could get out. We don't need any more traffic. The buses at the church, I don't know how many buses they have, but they only use two to four. I've watched them. The maximum they've used is four. They need to get rid of the rest of them. And we've already been instructed. They cannot take those buses to Jessamine County because Jessamine County does not want them on their property. over in Jessamine County. So why do we want it? We're not a bus station. And the other thing is, I'm sorry, I work from home. I do not want to hear children out there screaming and calling and all that kind of thing. When they do have properties over there with the kids, I don't know if they can have heard, I'm not sure they've heard it. They use megaphones to get these kids in line. Megaphones. We don't want to hear that. And the area that they want to use for the daycare, which is that big black building area, when they have participation in there, they leave those big doors open. And we hear all that noise. We don't want to hear that. And the, I just noticed this on here, the, can I finish? Yeah, that's the end of time. All these, you can't tell it, but all of these fences in that area, several in there, they don't belong to the church. They're ours. We put them up there. We don't want them moved, and we don't want them taken down and put on something else. That's our fences. Okay, thank you. We appreciate it. Good afternoon. Please state your name for the record. Yeah, my name is Tom Brooks. I live at 3012 Neal Drive. I'm Priscilla's husband. Okay, okay. We got three minutes, please. Everything that surrounds this whole area right here is single-family houses. And we Houston don't feel like it's going to fit in there, especially with the added noise that we're going to get. And I know someone's mentioned the church in Jessamine County. There's a lot of room at that church, and it's in more of a secluded area where the noise wouldn't make any difference. And Priscilla mentioned it, that the fences, the privacy fences are fences that we've all paid for ourselves. It's nothing that the church has paid for. The fence that was there when we bought the house new in 1992 was a chain link fence. And we built our privacy fence on the inside of that. I think one way to eliminate, and I know Dana mentioned something about barriers, you know, maybe a smaller version of those barriers that they put up on a highway to stop the noise. But that's real. That's all I have. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. Hi, my name is Theodore Paholic. I live at 3008 Neal Drive. That's right next to the one with the pool that they were discussing. It seems to me that the reason why we're here is to try to get in a daycare set up to have more kids, because it sounds like they already have a K through 12, and they're looking for the ranges of 1 through 4. Is that correct? Instead of. It sounds like instead of K through 12. So they're not going to have. We'll make sure the applicant addresses it when come back. OK, so currently there's a lot of noise that definitely comes from back there. As you can see from where my house is, the doors that she's talking about, that Priscilla talked about being left open and the noise that comes from inside that building, which must have giant DJ speakers or something. I don't know. It basically is rocking through our house. We can hear it when they have it. It's not like it's every day or anything like that, but it definitely doesn't seem like they're trying to tone it back. And also the buses. The buses are very loud, and they seem to be in disrepair. I just heard one breakdown the other day. They had to send it back because a part fell off of it. Fumes are pretty bad as well. Also, like they said earlier, it would be great if we could have some kind of abatement to fight off the noise, the fumes from the buses. And I'm not sure that the current six-foot fence is enough to keep that. And also, my house will be backing up, is backed up to right where they're going to, they're proposing to build a playground. So then the playground for all the children is right up against the back of my house as well. So that's the reason why I'm here is just talk about a noise abatement or anything that would be something that we could talk about. That's it. Thanks. Thank you. We appreciate it. Just maybe let me start off in saying, you know, at the end of the day, the church and the school wants to be a good neighbor. and we appreciate the comments and the concerns that are raised, and an opportunity to maybe rebut some of the things that need to be rebutted. And I do want to address the one question. It is, in fact, that the facility there would be preschool only and no longer have the K-12 there. So it's essentially a substitution. And so when we look at the staff report and the recommendation for approval, it specifically indicates that the staff believes that this would not adversely affect the surrounding properties. And we agree with that sentiment. in part because we think that if anything, the impact would be less than what it is with the K-12. I talked a little bit about traffic patterns being different and lower, or not a high magnitude all at one time in the morning and all at one time in the afternoon. With respect to kids playing in the back of the property, there was a comment about, well, children were not regulated at some point in time. We respectfully disagree with that, but we also understand at times kids can be loud and maybe go beyond what they want. And a part of what we want to do is teach respect, respect to the students themselves, respect to the neighbors, and address those concerns when they come up. So we're hopeful we do that. But with respect to the preschool, there is a defined playground area that has minimum requirements by the board and the ordinances where it would be fenced in, as indicated by the location that the gentleman just mentioned. But that area is going to be a smaller area than what they currently use the entire backyard for. And so, you know, hopefully that that would, if anything, make a lower negative impact. There were comments about buses. This use won't change the buses that are there. The buses are there properly and lawfully. And so there's really no impact there. That's really not before this board. So let me pause there and see what questions I can answer. Could you show me on the aerial photograph where the proposed playground will be located? Yes. So if you see in the brown, I'm not sure if I can use the wood. Okay. So right in this area where those vehicles are is roughly, I believe it's 35 by 70 on the plan. So it wouldn't take up that entire rectangle behind the house, but it would take up 70 foot parallel to the larger building. And then going roughly north-south, 35 feet, I believe is what we've amended it to. But you'll still be able to get the buses in and out? Yes, we would still be able to get the buses in and out. On the east end of the site there, is that the buses parked in the back? That is correct. On the lower right of the picture on the east end, that is correct. Are those functional buses or are those just stored there? I know some are functional. I honestly don't know if they all are or not. Is there privacy fences right now existing between the church property and all the residential properties? That's my understanding. Although, yeah, that's my understanding. There are fences, though. They're not there. Correct, yeah. I think it's the property owners adjacent to the churches. Okay. Any further questions of the applicant? Yes. Have you ever had a chat with the neighbors, like sent out flyers and said come to a meeting or just to ventilate some? Yeah, it's my understanding the church is always receptive to communicate with whomever. I know there were some written comments with some concerns about that. But any time someone approaches the church, the church should be receptive and absolutely talk through the issues to see if there can be a solution. What about the possibility of removing the non-functional buses? So respectfully, I'm happy to have that conversation with my client. I think that's a conversation we can certainly have. I would submit to the board that that's not part of what you have to decide today. But I think that's certainly appropriate for the church to consider. That could be a condition. I can't comment on that. I mean, I guess I don't have authorization from my client to make that commitment. Thank you. Storage of buses that are not functional could be a zoning compliance issue, and that is something that could be investigated by our zoning compliance staff. It does not necessarily have to be tied to this particular application because those buses, in my understanding, are related directly to the church use, but that is something that we can look into a little further. And certainly we aim to comply with the ordinances, so certainly if that's an issue, we'll address it. Thank you. Any further questions? How long had the property been used as a school? It's my understanding since the mid-70s, mid-1970s, maybe 1976. Thank you. I don't think we have any true issue. I'm speaking mad at myself. At least I don't have any issue with what you're trying to do. The place builder criteria always says you're supposed to get with neighbors, and your neighbors have already voiced a concern that you've got, looks like about 21 buses, seven vans. That'd be nice to address with them. I think the amplified speakers and the doors left open are two other issues that they have problems with. And it's not necessarily this board's jurisdiction to decide those certain things, but it would make it a lot cleaner if you had conversations with your neighbors of, guys, we're getting ready to do this. What do you think? And that seems to be the things that float to the top that be quicker, easy fixes, is getting rid of the junk buses and stop being loud, bad neighbors. Sure. No, and I appreciate that. I mean, I think that's certainly appropriate to have those conversations. and we'll inform our client to make sure that they are. But there again, I think our position is that this use of the preschool isn't going to negatively impact what is currently going on for years and years. Thank you. Any further questions, comments? If not, I'll entertain a motion. I'm sorry, public comment is closed. Thank you. Madam Chair, I move to approve PLMBOA 27-87 Clays Mill Road Baptist Church Board of Trustees request for conditional use for child care center accessory to a place of religious assembly in a single family residential zone on property located at 3000 Clays Mill Road based on staff recommendations and subject to the three conditions. Thank you. Ms. Tucker has offered a second. If there's no further discussion, we'll take a vote. Thank you. The motion is passed. Thank you. Thank you. Preschool. All right. Let's see where we are. Okay. At this time, we will allow staff to come and speak regarding our STRs, our short-term rentals. And then we have two cases to review in this category. Good afternoon. We do have two short-term rental applications this month, so we wanted to give our sort of brief short-term rental overview ahead of your review of those two applications. So as you know, short-term rental regulations were adopted right about a year ago on July 11th of 2023. Short-term rentals that had been operating prior to that date were able to be grandfathered in up until January 11th. So any short-term rentals that have started operation since July or who failed to get their permitting done by January 11th that are unhosted in our residential zones are now coming before you all for conditional use permits. Any short-term rental with an occupancy of greater than 12 would require a short-term rental conditional use approval. So as of, this is our data from last month, but it has increased slightly, but we have processed around 800 zoning compliance permits for short-term rentals through the Division of Planning, including all of those that were grandfathered in and the ones that you all have heard and approved so far. The zoning ordinance was amended to add in the regulations for short-term rentals, and that included two new definitions. We defined a hosted short-term rental and an unhosted short-term rental. Again, generally the short-term rentals that you all see are the unhosted short-term rentals. You could have the potential to see a short-term rental that was hosted if there was a high occupancy. That has not happened yet, but it could. This chart shows the short-term rental regulations for each zone. So based on the zoning category, whether it's hosted or unhosted, whether it's a principal use or conditional use, and then how many short-term rentals you can have per property. So generally, if it's a single-family lot, you can have one dwelling unit used as a short-term rental. For conditional uses, for all conditional uses, you're able to review things related to whether or not it will adversely affect the subject or the surrounding properties, and whether or not there are necessary public facilities and services available for the use. You can look at things like noise, traffic, parking, compatibility with the area, and compliance with other regulations. So these are things like what you've been hearing about with the other conditional uses that you've reviewed today. In addition to that, though, Article 3-13 provides some specific guidance for short-term rentals, outlining a few additional items that the board should consider whenever you evaluate these. Those are the number of short-term rentals that are within proximity to the use. Our staff has sort of considered in proximity to be about 1,000 feet, so whenever we're doing our staff reports and evaluating the area, that's the distance that we're sort of looking at. You also should be looking at the demonstrated compliance record of the applicant if they do operate other STRs in Lexington. The occupancy rate of other short-term rentals, that one has been pretty tricky to pin down. There's not really good data available about what the occupancy rate is for these. Even as we get our new software through the Division of Revenue that tracks short-term rentals a little bit better for us, occupancy rate is pretty tricky because there are other reasons that an owner could block off their calendar that may not mean that the property is being rented. They may be doing maintenance or they may be staying there personally or something like that. So we've not really been able to evaluate that one. And then finally, whether or not other short-term rentals in the area have been cited as a nuisance, including those operated by the applicant. So here you can see a map that shows all of the little green spots. Those are all of our short-term rentals throughout the community. Here you see that same map. The red dots that you can see here, they're a little bit small, but right here, this is one of our short-term rental applications for today. That's their 1,000-foot area, and then the second one is right here. So our staff, again, we're looking at that 1,000 feet. As far as whether or not other short-term rentals in the area have been cited as a nuisance and the applicants demonstrated compliance record, we have been engaging on a regular basis with other divisions including revenue, zoning enforcement, and the police department. Every month we provide those groups with lists of the short-term rental applications that we have received for you all so that they can let us know if there's anything going on in those vicinities or if there's anything related to that particular operator or that particular address that could be of concern. And we're including that information in your staff reports. We also are trying to provide a little bit of additional context related to that number of other short-term rentals within 1,000 feet because 1,000 feet doesn't always mean the same thing in every neighborhood. Some neighborhoods have smaller lots, so there are a lot more properties within 1,000 feet and other neighborhoods, it may mean something a little bit different. So we have started to look at the percentage of properties that have a residential use on them that are being used as short-term rentals. Staff generally considers a percentage of 5% or greater to be a high percentage in most neighborhoods. You can see here the two applications that you have this month. One, there were 13 other short-term rentals in the vicinity, which accounts for about 3.3% of the parcels that have a residential use within that 1,000 feet. And then the second one, there were no other short-term rentals within 1,000 feet, so that's 0%. I'll touch on the task force on neighborhoods in transition report. This came out of the mayor's task force to ensure that neighborhoods that were vulnerable to gentrification and involuntary displacement were not being exacerbated in these neighborhoods. So there are ten priority areas that have been outlined, and generally staff considers those areas to be inappropriate for short-term rentals because the commercial use could have a negative impact on that displacement and gentrification. Neither of the applications today fall into any of the top ten census tracts. And with that, I will answer any questions that you have broadly about short-term rentals. Otherwise, we can move on to your current applications. Yes, thank you. The software, is there a closer date when it might appear? I don't have an exact date. We do have the software I believe has been purchased and we're in the process of getting it all set up. So it is moving forward sooner rather than later hopefully. Thank you. this is more of a point of order oh there it comes i was going to ask to refresh my screen can you speak into your mic a little bit no she just needed the screen refresh yeah i think the screen refreshes she just did her screen was very good yeah it's good yeah thank you okay no other questions we'll call the first case It's PLNBOA 24-73, that's Francois Monikazi. The applicant will come forward please. This has been recommended for approval, but we do have some public comment with some opposition here. So would you like to tell us a little bit about your plans in Skyview? My plan of. Just your project, your plan. My plan is to have the property for short term rental. It's four bedrooms. My maximum allowance of people is eight people. And I cannot define how many times it's going to be rented. It's just going to depend on the market. That's all. Thank you. Do we have any applicant questions before I allow public comment? Okay. You can take a seat for just a moment. There was someone here to speak. I can't remember you. Okay. First of all, I don't think this should be done in a subdivision right in the middle of a subdivision. State your name first for the record. I'm sorry. Lois Kirkland. Okay. right in the middle of a subdivision, there is no parking. He should have land to have his own parking lot. And the street is already so bad with people parking on them, they're not getting their mail. I can't even get out of my driveway because all the way up through there, there's cars parked and I can't see to pull out. And there's other people on that side of the street in the same position as I am. And, you know, even to emergency vehicles, they're having trouble getting through there because that's a main highway to get over into the subdivision on Sandersville. And, you know, I don't know why they even allow parking on the street on that, you know, just maybe on one side or something so vehicles could get through there. But, you know, then on top of everything else, who's he bringing into the neighborhood? Are these people being checked out? I mean, you know, most of us have lived there. I've lived there 16 years, and I've, well, of course, from now I have grandchildren, but there's other people that have children there. There's buses that, you know, stop there and let children off and everything. Who's he bringing in to the neighborhood, you know, at that point? How do we know who's been brought in? And what about the value of the property? Is the value of the property going to go down? Of course, everybody in Lexington pays high property tax. But is our value going down on our houses there because of this or what? My house backs up exactly to where he's at. My backyard is next to his house. You know, and so how do I know, you know, what's going to happen? Who's coming and going? Is this going to happen? People coming and going all hours of the night or what? You know, we have no idea what's going to happen, you know, about all this. I just wondered if it's actually going to check out people, you know, that he rents to or what. And apparently this has been going on without a permit anyway. So, you know. I don't, but that's it. I don't have anything. I just, you know, it's very concerned about it. I don't want something to happen, you know, to our neighborhood and bring our value down or anything happen to our children or anything like that. I just want to know who's coming and going and what's going to be done about all the traffic on the street and all this parking. I know there's people, you know, two or three days, people are parking in front of mailboxes and that they're not even getting their mail. So I just, you know, I'm totally against it. Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment? Okay, we can have the applicant. And if you'd like to address some concerns regarding parking and background, those things. Yeah, I'm really shocked to see her coming today to be against what I'm trying to do because she's one of my nice neighborhoods around the area. So, again, I'm really shocked to see that she's here. To answer her questions, the parking, I don't think it's going to be an issue. And the issue she's mentioning is now for my property. I have, when we lived there, it was only me and my family. And then we have two cars. We parked in the garage. and then this is not the problem that I'm bringing to the place. So I don't know how I can answer to other questions. And then the second part about the parking is, even though I have a lot of guests coming, and then I mentioned that I can only have like eight people, so let's assume that there's eight vehicles that are coming to the property. There's two that can park in the garage. There's two that can park outside the garage. There's two that can park. There is a street where there's no house, so they can park over there. And then on my rental agreements, I have planning to instruct the renter to park in this naked area that I'm going to choose from them when they come to parking. And the problem she's mentioning is the neighborhood, the one that lives right across me, they have like four vehicles, three or four vehicles. One of them is a police officer. And then it's not an issue for me. So if she has an issue, maybe she can address those people on the other side. Also, she mentioned that there has been people living there. I don't think that she's been accurate because she doesn't know my family. And then when we talk, we just say hi to each other. We never sit there and talk. She never pushed us to come and talk, have a conversation. I don't know why she mentioned that. I'm an African, and my family is a large family. My brother even lives in the vicinity, and then we, it's like a family of eight people. And then if I have visitors that come visit me, and then if there is an empty space, I can let them borrow the place for the time being because it's vacant. So I'm not sure about that, what she said. People identity, she mentioned that also. We live in the U.S. where you can go live everywhere you want, even when we rent hotels. People rent hotels. We don't know if they are criminal or not. So for me, it's not, I don't know what was the problem because if there is an issue, we can call the police, 911, and we can intervene. And we have security in the states that can help if there is a matter concerning crime. And then my people who are going to be living there, I will make sure that they have a way of showing that there is no approval of criminal. thank you do we have any other questions anything further for the applicant all right if not i will entertain a motion i'll make a comment okay thank you in addressing the short-term rental situation we have come to realize that it is a commercial use in a neighborhood, and I think the neighbor's comments exemplifies that. And it's also a little bit difficult for the neighborhood to accept commercial uses, commercial use in their neighborhood. The other thing it does, it removes from a long-term rental person could be using this house or it could just be owned by an individual that uses a house without renting it out. And I'm not real certain, but I think this house is probably in the maybe $300,000 range. So it's an affordable house for someone. That's just my comment at this point. Thank you. I did have a question. I saw where you listed this house as your address and that you've got your brother or nephew live close by and they'll address emergencies and stuff. So I was just curious, where do you live at? Where do you live at? I live at the 613 sky view, that's the property. Okay, so if you rent it out. Yeah, where I live, do I not? Yes. I have another property in Iowa. In Iowa? Yes. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Anything further of this applicant? All righty. Nothing further. I will entertain a motion. All right. Madam Chair, I move to approve PLNBOA 24-73. Friendsaw Munizaki. Munizaki. Munizaki. Okay, I should have played detention. Request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a planned neighborhood residential zone on property located at 613 Skyview Lane. based on staff's recommendation and subject to the four conditions. Thank you, Mr. Walker. Do we have a second? Yeah, I'm going to second, and then I'm also going to make a comment that related to the neighbor's comments and also related to Ms. Plumlee's comments, that those are all policy comments that the city council has weighed and the city council looked at and the city council adopted this particular regulation, and it's not this body's position to make policy. It's we enact the policy that's been adopted by the elected officials. And so with that, I'm going to second this motion because I have not heard anything today that would not otherwise be just a general policy concern and disagreement over the SDRs in general. Thank you. Thank you. Anything further? We will take a vote. Thank you. Motion is passed. Good luck. Okay. And it looks like our last case is PLNBOA 24-79. Diane James. applicant will please come forward thank you hello okay let's see name please diane james okay all right it looks like the staff has recommended approval we do have some um public comment and concern so maybe if you can tell us a little bit about your project okay this is a It's a house that I own. It is right next door to my own house. It's a house that I actually began to Airbnb in 2021. And I rented as a short-term rental typically over those years has been about 10 to 12 times a year, weekends a year. And I keep this house so that I can have it for when my family from out of town comes to visit. I have about five, four children with families. They come, and then we have a convenient place for everybody to meet. I, about, well, after, sometime in March, I believe, I had read the article in the newspaper. A friend had told me there's an article about STRs. I was at the library and read it. I don't take that newspaper and realized I need to apply for an application, which I did. I wasn't aware even until after I applied for the application that there was even a grandfather clause, which was unfortunate because that would have been a very easy way to, you know, register. but uh... so now i'm in the process of you know becoming uh... registered questions do we have questions of the applicant but just for clinton thirty so you have been opera you had been operating previously right which i stopped operating when I, well, I began the application process and then I received a notice from the revenue department at which point I stopped operating renting as an STR. Okay, and prior to then you said how much were you occupied? The average over that time was 10 to 12 times per weekends per there might have been a couple two-week periods in that as well, but 10 to 12 times a year. and would you expect the volume to be the same or expect i don't expect any difference we are open for public comment whoever would like to speak first well my name is charles height on it nine twenty nine aurora about a block as the crow flies from this subject property. I was here two months ago at your meeting, again, speaking against short-term rentals. Nothing against Ms. James and her desire, but we have just been overrun with short-term rentals in the Kenwick neighborhood. As I said before, I've been a city planner, private practice for about 38 years now, coming out of where I have a master's degree in city planning and I have attained the AICP. So this is my field as well as planning staff's field. As I said two months ago, planning is not like engineering. There's no one correct answer at the end of the day. There are many interpretations of regulations and many correct answers at the end of the day. Staff says there are, that the number of STRs in our neighborhood is not too high. I firmly disagree. And to show you what it looks like, there's a map. The property that we were against two months ago is in the dark circle. And then just two blocks down is the P property, the subject of our discussion this afternoon. You can see the plethora of short-term rentals in our neighborhood. I'd like to do the next slide. I'm sorry Chad is gone. He was looking forward to this math exercise. If you take the acreage in the urbanized area of the urban county government of the USA and apply the 13 units per thousand feet radius, you would allow over 10,000 STRs just in the USA. With the occupancy that this lady is asking for, which is average, four people per STR, That would be 40,332 people you could allow in the USA on any given day in Lexington Fayette. That's approximately one-eighth of the population of the urban county government. I think that's way too high, and it shows you that Kenwick has been inordinately overburdened with STRs. I proudly wear the Kenwick neighborhood t-shirt. Our neighborhood is celebrating its 115th anniversary this year. We're a proud neighborhood. I'm going to quote here from the staff report on this property. It says, nationally, communities are concerned that unhosted whole house short-term rentals have negative impacts on housing affordability and availability. I agree. And my neighbor, Mr. Kleckner, is going to speak a little bit more on that in just a minute. What the report fails to mention is also there are national studies that show that property values go down with a plethora of STRs. Madam Chairwoman, members of the Board of Adjustment, I hope you will act independently and vote against this recommended use. Thank you very much. Thank you. My name is Mark Kleckner. I'll say in the beginning there's no math in my presentation. But it is about policy, Mr. Gross, and I will give you that it's, as you said, it is that, but I'm going to say it anyway. My name is Mark Kleckner. I've lived in Kenwick for more than 40 years. My home is about three blocks from 912 Kramer, which is actually in Mentel neighborhood, by the way, just barely. Over the past 10 years or so, property values in Kenwick and Mintel have been rising rapidly. My most recent tax assessment is nearly double what it was 10 years ago. Fortunately, I plan well for retirement and I can easily afford the extra tax money. But many people in the neighborhood cannot. There are actually people living on fixed incomes and disability payments who may not be able to keep their homes. It's well established that converting residential housing to short-term rentals contributes to increased property values and a decrease in the availability of affordable housing. It is also well established that Lexington has a significant shortage of affordable housing. Mayor Gordon recently announced an increase to around $5 million for affordable housing for the next year's budget. So does it make sense for the city to sanction and encourage the conversion of hundreds of existing residential properties to many motels? I think the answer is obvious. Thank you for your time. We have more comment, please. I'm Betsy Kephart, and my husband and I own a piece of property on Hanover. It's a lovely duplex, and we have two wonderful tenants who have been there for years and years and years. My big concern is parking and noise. It's a lovely neighborhood. It's a lovely, quiet neighborhood. I have direct knowledge of a neighborhood in another state where after the short-term rentals took over, there are now only three permanent residents in this neighborhood and 30-something houses in the neighborhood are short-term rentals. We do not want this to happen to Hanover, ever. And just looking at the density of STRs in this neighborhood should immediately throw red flags up to you all. I mean, this is crazy. We don't need any more in this neighborhood. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Do we have anyone else? I got a question for staff. Could we put up the picture that the gentleman from Kenwick had that showed all the short-term rentals? We can. Thank you. And then if you could also, once it's up, explain how far the 1,000-foot goes. Actually, it might be easier to have in our PowerPoint the 1,000-foot buffer. That works for me, too. Yeah. So that might be. There we go. So I will say that I would guess that based on some of the dots that were shown on the residence exhibit, that some of those are not registered. They may be advertising but have not gone through the appropriate processes, just given where the ones that are appropriately permitted are located, as you can see here on the screen. So we don't have any way, unfortunately, of calculating how many are not fully compliant in an area when we're looking at that 1,000 feet. And we tend to think that it's best not to penalize the applicant who is going through the appropriate process because there are others in the neighborhood who have not done that. And whenever those folks are located, hopefully through the use of our software or through complaints coming in, that that will be taken into consideration when they're being heard rather than someone who's coming in ahead of them and trying to do the right thing. I've got a question for planning. Did you all investigate the short-term rentals that were identified by the neighborhood? This is the first that we are seeing this exhibit as well. Are there questions of staff? Will those short-term rentals that were pointed out by the neighborhood be looked at to be added to our database? So this document does not give specific addresses and it's likely that these are not located exactly where the short term rentals are. But I will certainly share this document with our zoning enforcement staff and with revenue staff to see if they can do some research into these short term rentals as well. It is a little bit tricky when we don't know exactly where they are, but it will certainly give them some ideas of places to look. Please come to the podium. Mr. Grimes, who is usually here at these meetings and unfortunately could not come, I'm pretty sure he has the addresses, the specific addresses that correspond to that visual that we showed you. And maybe it didn't make it to the presentation, but we turned that visual in two months ago when we fought the short-term rental on Richmond Avenue. Very same map. Well, I know a lot of the neighborhoods, people who are on the associations and those that are looking at the short-term rentals have documented a lot of those. I don't think they're on our database, but I know the neighborhood people know where they are. I'm sure Mr. Grimes will be happy to get in touch with planning staff. just a lot of the lines that there is some concern of using the ones that may be operating improperly while we're trying to prove people that are going through the right process because at the end of the day they might have missed their boat if they didn't do what they needed to do and we already reached capacity part to those uh... incorrect operators uh... anything but the applicant can't come forward again please and if you'd like to address any of the public comment or to steal prefer questions from the board that just on the comments you know i understand there are a lot of fears there are some that have played themselves out and some that have not certainly understand issue of affordable housing in my correct huge footprint in trying to help with that situation and i want you all to know that that that is an important issue and there are a lot of ways to be involved that issue that are beyond just STR. And I would encourage anyone of you to be involved in some of those things too. So otherwise I don't really have a response. But there is one question I have on the recommendations made. One of them was required me to continue to stay in the house I own for this to be passed. And I'm curious, is that a requirement generally of? Yeah, that is, staff can answer commenting on our conditions. So typically whenever an applicant includes in their application that they are a neighbor or within close proximity to the short term rental that they're requesting to operate, We have included that condition because it's a little bit more comforting generally I think to neighbors and to staff that the operator will be readily available very nearby. It's a little bit of a greater level of oversight. So we have included recommendations with that condition. Obviously short-term rentals that are unhosted where the operator does not live nearby don't have that same condition. So you could request that the board take that condition off. but generally whenever it has been offered that you know you live nearby and that enables you to provide a better operation of the short-term rental we have included that condition okay I understand that that aspect of it I guess you know my thought was what if I moved to a smaller house in the neighborhood what would I have to reapply that that's all I'm it was just very specific and I think that would be the case if if something changes then you you would have the opportunity to come back and update the conditional use. So it's an update, it's not the whole process? Well, I think. Right, it would be, you could request to modify the conditions of approval. So in that situation, you would not be in jeopardy of losing the conditional use if it had been approved. You would just be subject to those conditions. And then you could request that they be modified. All right, that's not an issue then. Okay, thank you. Do we have any other questions? I did have a comment. We do generally feel, or me, the me part of me, more comfortable when the owner, the operator is nearby and you are next door. Yeah. And so that in itself, I guess, has some assurances that you'll be careful about your choices and who will be in the property next door. And then I would also say just the history of usage prior to this coming in play where you have already done it. And I don't believe we've had any record of complaints from your neighbors or no one came to say they're already having an issue with what you've done. So those things do lend for me to feel more comfortable with these applications as well. But with that being said, I will open it to further comment or entertain a motion. I'll go ahead and move for approval of PLM BOA 2479 Diane James' request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a mixed load density residential zone at 912 Cramer Avenue based upon the staff's report, the testimony today, and subject to the conditions set forth in the report. Thank you. Do we have a second? I have a comment. I appreciate all Mr. Gross's comments about policy and whatnot, but I also believe that we've been given the task of considering each short-term rental on a case-by-case basis and the suggestion by the staff of 5% being in the area too many or too little. And I think personally this neighborhood has just been overrun with short-term rentals. And so anyway, I cannot support this. We do have a motion on the table, but along those lines, just clarification, you think it should be less than 5% is what you were saying there? I think it depends on the case. Okay. Okay. further i'm sorry we have a motion do we have a second so a motion without a second fails if someone wants to make a motion for disapproval Let me know who and I can prepare findings for you. We will take a brief recess, maybe ten minutes. Five minutes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next video. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We will call back into session. And at this time, I will entertain a motion. I'd like to make a motion with regards to PLN VOA 2479. Diane James requests for a conditional use permit to operate a short-term rental. I move for disapproval based on the following findings of fact. In fact, evidence at the hearing showed that the 13 permitted short-term rentals exist within 1,000 feet of the proposed short-term rental. And number two, evidence also showed that the proposed short-term rental is on a street with insufficient on-street parking to handle the additional traffic that this high concentration of short-term rentals would create. thus the subject property is surrounded by a high concentration of short-term rentals for nearby single-family homes 3.3% and allowing another short-term rental would have an adverse influence on the surrounding neighborhood by further increasing the volume of traffic thank you and we have a second from miss plumley um i will open for vote the motion has passed your request has failed for the uh short-term rental thank you i'll move on to next one i will just make one additional comment um particularly because some of the people here do have an investment property in the area. I just think this is a common mixed use in any residential area, that some properties are rental and some properties are money-making, and as long as they're still used in the residential nature, it does not completely convert it to commercial use. So it's just repeating the same opinions we repeat every week, every month, I mean. Thank you. All righty. I think that was the last item on the docket. We do have some other items to address, board items in particular. We do need to make an appointment of a new member for the Landscape Review Committee and the Lexington Tree Board. Is Mr. Walker coming back in? I'm sorry, honey? Is Mr. Walker coming back in? Oh, I thought he left. Oh, he left. Okay, sorry. Yeah, he's gone. I'm sure he wasn't left. Yep. No, thank you. um anyway the lexington tree board has recommended the newly appointed chair mr michael potop potop i don't know for appointment to the land landscape review committee and i think we did here in our work group session group this may change there's text that may change the committee but in the meantime um i will entertain a motion to so moved thank you second good because i couldn't say the name or butcher it again thank you so we have a first from mr gross and a second from miss plumber plumbly i'm sorry and we will open for vote all right the motion has passed we we have a new appointment. And then the staff has particular items to address. We do. You may recall last month, a citizen who is here today came before you to express concerns about a conditional use for a plant nursery at 7524 Old Richmond Road. You all asked us to provide an update with what zoning enforcement staff has found regarding that property and the citizen's concerns. So I just wanted to provide sort of a brief overview. We met with building inspections and enforcement staff last week. So just sort of a broad overview. The property was purchased in March by the current owner and they have been on the property from time to time, cleaning it up, doing maintenance, that kind of thing. Zoning enforcement staff in building inspection has visited the property several times since March. Those inspections occurred on May 22nd, May 29th, June 4th, and June 29th. They have also had conversations with the new owner. I'm sorry, did your mic go off? I may just not be. Okay. So May 22nd, May 29th. May 22nd, May 29th, June 4th, and June 29th. Building inspections, zoning enforcement staff has had conversations with the new owner. has indicated that he does plan to use the existing conditional use permit in order to operate a plant nursery building inspection has determined that there is no need to ask the board to hold a revocation hearing at this time based on that information that he does plan to utilize the conditional use as long as there is no violation occurring and the applicant or i'm sorry not the applicant the owner indicates that they plan to utilize that conditional use there's no reason to request that the board hold a revocation planning staff and building inspection staff have both provided the owner with the full history of the property and the conditional use permit that has been approved by this board including all of the conditions and they have let him know that if he plans to make any changes to the way the business is operated or any physical changes to the property like paving or fencing that that would need to come back before this body the annual inspection for the conditional use as you all know every conditional use is inspected inspected by zoning enforcement staff annually to make sure that they are meeting the conditions that is scheduled for September so at this time building inspection does plan to perform another inspection in September and at that time they will reevaluate whether or not the owner is indeed moving forward with the existing conditional use if there are changes that they need to make that necessitate a return to the board and if they're not going to be operating that conditional use or some other use that would require them to come back to you then they could potentially report that to you all and request that a revocation be held at that time let's see so again they have not found that there are any current violations of the conditional use permit they've not found that any business is operating there at this time and the applicant has indicated that they do plan to move forward with the conditional use so that's really all information that we have at this time um i just received an envelope i'm guessing from ms gano is that no okay i'm not sure where this came from so this is from the the property owner and they say that they are still working on a plan for the property and in the meantime they are gradually cleaning it up um when they purchased the property it was in rough shape two additional half built greenhouses were left on the property that need to be removed first i can pass this around it shows a couple of photos of the property and has the current owner's contact information we did let them know that you all would be hearing about their property today of course you all are not making any decisions about this property today but we did feel it was appropriate to let the owner know that that their property was being discussed and so just for clarification we we have an update there's no matter before us no motions to be had but we're going to have three minutes for public comments yes okay i had a question so the conditional use permit does go with the sale of the property yes in this case there was no null and void condition or anything like that so unless the board specifically places that condition like you do from time to time the conditional use is transferable Well, I do have some new information to share with you. Please begin with your name for the record. Yes, absolutely. My name is Lisa Gonneau and I live at 7525 Old Richmond Road. And so on March 26th has been stated, Nicely Family Properties LLC closed on 7524 Old Richmond Road for $40,000. My property and the surrounding properties are worth significantly more and are taxed for more, and this property has continued to go down in value rather than up. When I met with building inspection after the last BOA meeting, I heard that staff were aware that this property had never been functional and had not met the conditions. Not all that were there were aware that the conditional use should be commenced in a year and should be reported to the BOA if that is not true. was ever mentioned at that time that the new owner planned to do a plant nursery. So we didn't hear that last time. I didn't hear that from building inspection. So there remains no application for the property in Excella with the division of planning since March. Building inspection lists this property as a greenhouse business, not a plant nursery on Excella, with six inspections made from May 20th to July 3rd. July 3rd was the last one. Each time it says further investigation required. What further investigation is needed if conditions are not met and the property's not in use? This is a red herring as the property should be commenced in one year and has not been since 2020. It's very interesting to me too, the building inspection told me they couldn't inspect the inside of the building, but they're building inspection, right? So in the zoning ordinance it says that planning is allowed to check inside these buildings and that is in the zoning ordinance. Nicely Family Properties is listed on the Secretary of State's website with Aaron Reedy as the Register Agent, a Lexington attorney with vacation home experience and Airbnb ties. On Saturday, July 6th, of course the holiday weekend again, a crew of three cars and people unknown were at the greenhouse and in the greenhouse. so they had access to it. And you usually don't bring a young child if you're planning to do maintenance on a building that's a greenhouse with nothing in it. I'd like to know, was the property leased or sold again? Because I mentioned last time, Nicely also has excavating and concrete business. So we've got a vacation business and an excavation and concrete business. So who really owns this? Who is there? They erected six private property signs on Saturday, including some attached to trees on the state right-of-way in front of my home. So, is it intended for a plant nursery, a vacation home? If it's leased, it should be known. I fully believe the real owner needs to be here to explain this and a revocation hearing is needed. If it's already been inspected six times, why wait to inspect again in September and delay the hearing? What difference will a month make? The neighbors, for safety reasons, need to know who's here and what the intentions are. There needs to be a real resolution. The conditional use shouldn't continue since it hasn't been a functioning plant nursery. There's no plants grown outside. Other conditions such as parking and the illegal use of a drive were never resolved. Let the real owner speak to this next month. You can obviously, as has been done with this property, revoke a conditional use and give a new one. Why is the city so worried about this 1.46 acre lot with a long history? As a board, you should be asking why they didn't report this to you. Autumn told Kathy Plowman this morning about the use for a plant nursery. Again, this is the first time I've heard this and on the day of this meeting, how convenient. After I met with building inspection, equipment on the property that was illegal left. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Were there any further items from staff for today? I don't think so I'm happy to answer any questions that you have again there is nothing before you today for you to decide there will not be anything for you unless building inspection finds that the applicant needs to either reapply for their conditional use for a new use or modify the existing use or if they're not going to continue with the use and then building inspection could ask you to hold a revocation hearing the other the other option that that dr. Gano has is to file an administrative appeal to contest the decision of building inspection that there is not a violation that is something that that could come before you as far as the the one-year commencement of the use there is a provision in article 7 of the zoning ordinance that that states that if building inspection zoning enforcement staff finds that a conditional use has not been commenced within a year they can report that to the board to hold a revocation hearing our practice historically has not been to do that generally if building inspection finds that a conditional use is not being operated they don't bring that back to you to revoke it but they do have that option to do so so that's kind of our historic practice has been that it it remains and that the and again the the owner indicating that they plan to use the conditional use is enough to say that that use has not been abandoned. So as long as the applicant intends to be moving forward with that use, there's no reason for us to recommend revocation. I'm sorry, public comment. Dr. Gonneau, public comment was closed at this time. Was there? Chairwoman Carter, may I just add that since 2020, the property has been in litigation until September of last year. So really- Is your mic on? It is. It is on. The property's been in litigation since 2020 at the neighbor's behest. And so it wasn't until September of 2023 that the Supreme Court, Kentucky Supreme Court, said that they were not going to hear the case. And that really is kind of the end of the litigation. So we're still within a year. It really puts a hold on the case. And I don't think we can expect a property owner to exercise a conditional use when they would basically be putting up quite a bit of risk in moving forward. And instead, you know, putting their time and effort into fighting the litigation as opposed to operating a business. And I just wanted to make that part of the record today. So what is the date when their time runs out on their conditional use permit? Well, we don't have an expiration date on conditional use permits. They are expected to be exercised within a one-year period. And if they are not, then the Division of Building Inspection can report to the Board of Adjustment as to their findings as to why they haven't exercised the conditional use. In most cases, the applicant is working towards that. Either they've secured financing or started some of the building permit application but not finished it and started the actual conditional use yet. But, again, Fayette County has provided some leniency in that. Otherwise, I think we would spend another hour here revoking permits every month. Can I clarify something, too, by tagging on what Tracy just said? unless there is some kind of condition added to what you approve you don't have to revoke a conditional use permit because it hasn't been operated in a year that's not mandatory on this board there is a provision that they should take some steps but just because they have it doesn't mean that automatically this board if there's a hearing would have to revoke it that would still something within your discretion based on the circumstances as tracy has just pointed out um excuse me public comment was closed i believe the chair just said that thank you i i have a question um for staff this may be redundant but what what are the conditions i mean i i don't know them it's i believe there are nine conditions i don't have those right in front of of me but there are several conditions related to the operation of these some of them were things that were fulfilled by the previous owner i believe related to the parking and that kind of thing but there is an expectation that they would operate a plant nursery but it was supposed to be a greenhouse the property has a a rather long history the conditional use that was approved in 2020 did not involve the construction of the greenhouse that greenhouse was constructed back i believe in 2009 but the plant nursery use allows them to use that greenhouse structure i was just thinking the greenhouse there's supposed to be greenhouse and it's not there anymore what happened there is a greenhouse structure it's still there okay there's some nuance in our zoning ordinance between a commercial greenhouse use and a plant nursery use so just because there is a greenhouse structure on a property does not mean that there is a commercial greenhouse use occurring so that that can get a little conflated dr gno please yeah okay thank you thank you okay were there any other staff items for today if not i'll announce the next meeting i'm sorry i do have one more staff item um no i'm not allowing that one i'm sorry so we will just go ahead and announce that go ahead truce to to our detriment but to autumn's benefit she is moving on to work for franklin county as the director of planning so we will miss her greatly and all of her expertise to the board over the past i want to say eight years eight years um but we wish her well and um hopefully she'll come back and visit us sometimes when she's in lexington so we also have a new um board of adjustment staff member coming that's a senior planner and his name is dalton belcher and so he will be with us starting in august so just some staff changes for us congratulations again autumn okay anything further not our next meeting date is august the 12th we know that because we We postponed everything until August the 12th, right? And same place, same location, 1.30. Nothing further. We're adjourned. you