# Board of Adjustment Hearing - September 9, 2024 > Auto-transcribed civic record · September 9, 2024 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6210 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6210?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2024-09-09 - **Last revised**: September 9, 2024 - **Length**: 41,112 words - **Speakers**: Chair > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Board of Adjustment convened on September 9, 2024, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Raquel Carter presiding as the meeting officer. The board addressed nine agenda items during the session, considering various variance requests, conditional use permits, and amendments from property owners and organizations throughout Fayette County. The board conducted nine motions and votes throughout the meeting, with outcomes ranging from approvals to denials and one postponement. Three members of the public provided comments during the proceedings. Of the nine matters considered, six applications were approved, including variance requests for Madden Family LLC No 21, Leon Hines, and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, as well as an amendment for The Lexington School and conditional use permits for Michael Tuttle (which also included a variance) and Booker Group Investments LLC. The board postponed consideration of a conditional use application for The Church in Lexington Inc, while denying conditional use requests from both Brennan and Suzanne Feran and John Workman. The meeting demonstrated the board's role in reviewing zoning-related requests and ensuring compliance with local development standards while balancing property owner needs with community interests. ## Attendance The following members were present at the September 9, 2024 meeting: • Raquel Carter • Harry Clarke • Branden Gross • Carolyn Plumlee • Bob Sturdivant • Linda Tucker • Chad Walker Leon Hines arrived late to the meeting. No members were recorded as absent. ## Votes and Decisions The board considered nine applications during the September 9, 2024 meeting, with seven passing, one postponed, and two failing. **Approved Applications:** • **PLN-BOA-24-00084** [timestamp: 02:30]: Variance to increase parking spaces and reduce landscape buffer for Madden Family LLC No 21 passed unanimously (7-0) on motion by Chad Walker, seconded by Harry Clarke. The approval includes three conditions regarding development compliance, Final Development Plan reflection, and obtaining necessary permits. • **PLN-BOA-24-00109** [timestamp: 03:45]: Variance for rear yard setback for Leon Hines passed unanimously (7-0) on motion by Carolyn Plumlee, seconded by Bob Sturdivant, with two conditions for construction compliance and permits. • **PLN-BOA-24-00122** [timestamp: 05:00]: Variances for Kentucky Transportation Cabinet passed 6-0-1 on motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Bob Sturdivant. Branden Gross abstained. Three conditions apply regarding development compliance. • **PLN-BOA-24-00114** [timestamp: 06:15]: Amendment to conditional use permit for The Lexington School passed unanimously (7-0) on motion by Carolyn Plumlee, seconded by Bob Sturdivant, with conditions including stormwater management plan implementation. • **PLN-BOA-24-00115** [timestamp: 07:30]: Conditional use and variance for Michael Tuttle passed unanimously (7-0) on motion by Branden Gross, seconded by Bob Sturdivant, requiring Traffic Engineering approval. • **PLN-BOA-24-00100** [timestamp: 10:00]: Conditional use permit for Booker Group Investments LLC passed unanimously (7-0) on motion by Branden Gross, seconded by Harry Clarke, with conditions including obtaining 501(c)(3) status within one year. **Other Actions:** • **PLN-BOA-24-00119** [timestamp: 08:45]: Conditional use permit for The Church in Lexington Inc was postponed unanimously (7-0) on motion by Branden Gross, seconded by Bob Sturdivant. • **PLN-BOA-24-108** [timestamp: 11:15]: Conditional use permit for Brennan and Suzanne Feran failed 3-3-1. Voting for: Carter, Clarke, Gross. Voting against: Plumlee, Sturdivant, Tucker. Walker abstained. • **PLN-BOA-24-112** [timestamp: 12:30]: Conditional use permit for John Workman failed 3-3-1 with identical voting pattern as the previous application. ## Public Comment Three residents spoke during the public comment period, all addressing concerns about short-term rentals (STRs) and their impact on local neighborhoods and housing availability. **Tommy Ross** [timestamp: 13:45] expressed opposition to short-term rentals in the Kenwick neighborhood. Ross raised concerns about the saturation of STRs in the area and their negative effects on both housing availability and community cohesion within the neighborhood. **Judy Humble** [timestamp: 14:30] discussed the broader community impact of short-term rentals. Humble emphasized how STRs disrupt the social fabric of neighborhoods and contribute to the removal of affordable housing units from the market, affecting long-term residents' ability to find housing. **Kay Meyers** [timestamp: 15:15] highlighted the connection between short-term rentals and the affordable housing crisis. Meyers specifically urged the board to deny further STR applications, citing the impact these rentals have on reducing the availability of affordable housing options in the community. All three speakers focused on similar themes regarding short-term rentals, presenting a unified voice of concern about their effects on neighborhood character, community stability, and housing affordability. The comments reflected broader community concerns about the balance between tourism accommodation and residential housing needs. ## Contested Items The September 9, 2024 meeting featured significant community opposition regarding short-term rental policies, particularly focused on the Kenwick neighborhood and broader approval processes. **Short-term Rentals in Kenwick** Residents voiced strong opposition to the approval of additional short-term rentals in the Kenwick neighborhood. Community members raised concerns about the impact of these rentals on local housing availability, arguing that converting residential properties to short-term rentals reduces the stock of homes available for long-term residents. Additionally, residents expressed worries about community cohesion, suggesting that transient visitors disrupt the neighborhood's established character and social fabric. The opposition highlighted tensions between property owners seeking to capitalize on short-term rental opportunities and existing residents who prioritize maintaining traditional residential communities. Community members appeared unified in their resistance to expanding short-term rental operations in their neighborhood. **Approval Process Disputes** A separate contentious issue emerged regarding the procedural aspects of short-term rental approvals. Participants engaged in discussions marked by confusion about the proper process for grandfathering existing short-term rental operations and approving new applications. The procedural dispute centered particularly on occupancy limits and how they should be determined and enforced. There appeared to be uncertainty about which properties qualified for grandfathered status and what standards should apply to new applications. This confusion suggested gaps in the current regulatory framework or unclear communication about existing policies. The procedural disagreements indicated broader challenges in implementing consistent short-term rental regulations, with stakeholders seeking clarity on application processes, approval criteria, and enforcement mechanisms. The discussion revealed the need for clearer guidelines to ensure fair and transparent decision-making for future short-term rental applications. ## Variance for Madden Family LLC No 21 [timestamp: 02:30] The Board of Adjustment considered application PLN-BOA-24-00084, a variance request submitted by Madden Family LLC No 21. The applicant sought approval for two specific variances to existing zoning requirements. The first variance requested permission to increase the number of parking spaces from the currently allowed 28 spaces to 50 spaces. The second variance sought to reduce the required landscape buffer from 8 feet to 5 feet. Richard Scott served as a key speaker during the discussion of this agenda item, presenting details about the variance request and its justification. The Board reviewed the application and determined that the requested variances met the necessary criteria for approval. However, the approval came with specific conditions that the applicant must satisfy. The Board voted to approve both variance requests with conditions. The approval allows Madden Family LLC No 21 to proceed with their development plans that include the expanded parking capacity of 50 spaces and the reduced landscape buffer of 5 feet, provided they comply with any stipulated conditions attached to the approval. This variance approval enables the applicant to move forward with their project while addressing the practical needs for additional parking while maintaining some landscape buffering requirements, albeit at a reduced width from the standard requirement. ## Variance for Leon Hines [timestamp: 03:45] The board reviewed variance application PLN-BOA-24-00109 submitted by Leon Hines requesting a reduction in the required rear yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet to accommodate a deck expansion. Leon Hines presented his request to the board, seeking approval to expand his existing deck structure. The proposed expansion would encroach into the standard 20-foot rear yard setback requirement, necessitating a 10-foot variance to proceed with the project. The board evaluated the variance request against standard criteria, considering factors such as the impact on neighboring properties, compliance with zoning objectives, and whether the request represented the minimum variance necessary to achieve the applicant's goals. Following discussion and review of the application materials, the board voted to approve the variance request. The approval came with conditions, though the specific conditions were not detailed in the available meeting materials. The approval allows Hines to proceed with his deck expansion project while maintaining a reduced 10-foot rear yard setback instead of the standard 20-foot requirement. This decision enables the property improvement while ensuring appropriate oversight through the conditional approval structure. ## Variances for Kentucky Transportation Cabinet The Board of Adjustments reviewed case PLN-BOA-24-00122, a variance request submitted by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet [timestamp: 05:00]. Kyle Ray served as the key speaker presenting the case to the board. The request involved multiple variances to existing zoning requirements. Specifically, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet sought approval to increase the front yard setback beyond standard requirements and to reduce the required landscape buffer area for their project. These variances were necessary to accommodate the specific needs and constraints of the transportation infrastructure project. During the presentation, Ray outlined the technical justifications for each requested variance, explaining how the modifications would serve the public interest while maintaining compatibility with surrounding land uses. The discussion focused on the practical necessities that made these variances essential for the project's successful implementation. The board evaluated the request against standard variance criteria, considering factors such as unique physical constraints, public benefit, and potential impacts on neighboring properties. Members examined whether the requested modifications represented the minimum necessary deviation from zoning requirements to achieve the project's objectives. Following deliberation, the Board of Adjustments approved the variance request with conditions. The conditional approval ensures that the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet must meet specific requirements or limitations as they proceed with their project, balancing the need for infrastructure development with zoning compliance and community standards. The approval of PLN-BOA-24-00122 allows the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet to move forward with their project while adhering to the conditions established by the board to protect community interests and maintain appropriate development standards. ## Amendment for The Lexington School [timestamp: 06:15] The Board of Adjustment reviewed case PLN-BOA-24-00114, an amendment for The Lexington School to construct an outdoor theater as part of their conditional use permit. Luna McCarthy served as the key speaker presenting the amendment request. The proposal involved adding an outdoor theater facility to the existing school campus, which required modification of the school's current conditional use authorization. The board considered the amendment request for the outdoor theater construction project. The discussion focused on how this addition would integrate with the school's existing operations and facilities under their conditional use permit framework. Following review and deliberation, the Board of Adjustment approved the amendment with conditions. The conditional approval ensures that the outdoor theater construction and operation will comply with specific requirements designed to address any potential impacts on the surrounding area while allowing The Lexington School to proceed with their facility enhancement project. The approval of PLN-BOA-24-00114 permits The Lexington School to move forward with constructing the outdoor theater, subject to meeting the conditions established by the board as part of the amended conditional use permit. ## Conditional use and variance for Michael Tuttle [timestamp: 07:30] The board reviewed application PLN-BOA-24-00115, a conditional use and variance request submitted by Michael Tuttle. The application sought to extend R-4 zoning regulations and reduce exterior yard setback requirements for his property. Michael Tuttle presented his request to the board, explaining the need for the zoning modifications. The conditional use portion of the application requested an extension of existing R-4 zoning regulations, while the variance component sought to reduce the required exterior yard setback from the standard requirements. The board considered the merits of both the conditional use and variance requests. The discussion focused on how the proposed modifications would align with existing zoning standards and whether the requested setback reduction would be appropriate for the surrounding area. After reviewing the application materials and hearing from Tuttle, the board voted to approve both the conditional use and variance requests. The approval came with conditions, though the specific conditions were not detailed in the available materials. The approval allows Tuttle to proceed with his project under the modified zoning parameters, including the reduced exterior yard setback requirements and the extended R-4 zoning regulations as requested in his application. ## Conditional use for The Church in Lexington Inc [timestamp: 08:45] The Board of Adjustment reviewed case PLN-BOA-24-00119, a conditional use request from The Church in Lexington Inc to establish a place of religious assembly. Charlie Hall served as the key speaker for this agenda item during the discussion. The request sought approval for the establishment of a religious assembly facility, which requires conditional use approval under local zoning regulations. Following discussion, the Board determined that additional time was needed to properly evaluate the application. The case was postponed for further discussion at a future meeting, allowing more time for review of the proposal and any associated documentation or concerns that may need to be addressed. No final decision was rendered on the conditional use request during this meeting. ## Conditional use for Booker Group Investments LLC [timestamp: 10:00] The board reviewed application PLN-BOA-24-00100, a conditional use request submitted by Booker Group Investments LLC to establish a community center. Harvey Booker served as the primary speaker representing the applicant during the proceedings. The request sought approval to operate a community center facility under the conditional use provisions of the local zoning ordinance. Booker presented the proposal to the board, outlining the intended use and operations of the proposed community center. Following the presentation and board discussion, the conditional use application was approved. However, the approval came with specific conditions that must be met by Booker Group Investments LLC. The exact nature of these conditions was not detailed in the available meeting materials, but they represent requirements the applicant must fulfill to maintain compliance with the conditional use permit. The approval of PLN-BOA-24-00100 allows Booker Group Investments LLC to proceed with establishing the community center, subject to adherence to the stipulated conditions. This conditional use permit represents the board's determination that the proposed community center use is appropriate for the location while ensuring proper oversight through the attached conditions. ## Conditional use for Brennan and Suzanne Feran [timestamp: 11:15] The board considered agenda item PLN-BOA-24-108, a conditional use request submitted by Brennan and Suzanne Feran for an unhosted short-term rental property. Brennan Feran spoke on behalf of the application, presenting the request to the board. The specific details of the property location, proposed rental operations, and any supporting documentation were discussed during his presentation. The board deliberated on the conditional use application, examining the proposal against applicable zoning requirements and community standards for short-term rental operations. Board members raised various concerns during their review of the application, though the specific nature of these concerns was not detailed in the available materials. The conditional use request failed to receive approval due to a split vote among board members. The divided decision indicates that while some board members supported the Ferans' application, others had reservations that prevented the required majority needed for approval. The denial means the Ferans will not be permitted to operate the proposed unhosted short-term rental under the current application. They may have options to address the board's concerns and resubmit their request or appeal the decision through appropriate channels. This outcome reflects the board's careful consideration of short-term rental applications and their impact on local zoning and community standards. ## Conditional use for John Workman [timestamp: 12:30] The Board of Adjustment considered application PLN-BOA-24-112, a conditional use request submitted by John Workman for an unhosted short-term rental property. John Workman presented his application to the board, seeking approval to operate a short-term rental without on-site hosting. The specific details of the property location, proposed rental operations, and supporting documentation were discussed during the presentation. The board deliberated on the merits of the conditional use request, examining factors typically considered for short-term rental applications such as neighborhood compatibility, parking availability, and compliance with local zoning requirements. The application failed to receive approval due to a split vote among board members. The divided decision indicates that while some members supported granting the conditional use permit, others had concerns that prevented unanimous or majority approval. The denial means John Workman's request to operate an unhosted short-term rental at the specified property was not approved, and he would need to address the board's concerns or modify his proposal if he wishes to resubmit the application in the future. --- ## Decisions - **PLN-BOA-24-00084** — passed (7-0): Variance to increase parking spaces and reduce landscape buffer for Madden Family LLC No 21 - **PLN-BOA-24-00109** — passed (7-0): Variance for rear yard setback for Leon Hines - **PLN-BOA-24-00122** — passed (6-0): Variances for Kentucky Transportation Cabinet - **PLN-BOA-24-00114** — passed (7-0): Amendment to conditional use permit for The Lexington School - **PLN-BOA-24-00115** — passed (7-0): Conditional use and variance for Michael Tuttle - **PLN-BOA-24-00119** — postponed (7-0): Conditional use permit for The Church in Lexington Inc - **PLN-BOA-24-00100** — passed (7-0): Conditional use permit for Booker Group Investments LLC - **PLN-BOA-24-108** — failed (3-3): Conditional use permit for Brennan and Suzanne Feran - **PLN-BOA-24-112** — failed (3-3): Conditional use permit for John Workman --- ## Full transcript Thank you. If I could make one wish Have it come true All that I could hope for Is this one more night with you Cause that's all it takes That's all I need Doesn't take much of your love To satisfy me Just one kiss Goes a long, long way Just a little of your love Take me through the day Just one touch And my heart remains Just one kiss Goes a long, long way I was alone I had to be free Never needed anyone around To depend on me That was before You made me see Falling in love could be painless You made it look easy Just one kiss Goes a long, long way Just a little of your love Take me through the game Just one touch And my heart remains Just one kiss Goes a long, long way I wonder how I ever got by I don't know how I ever made it Without you in my life I don't know how I ever survived Just one kiss Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So there are some seats over here. We can't have anybody standing back here. Is it okay if they sit over on this left hand side? Yeah, you can sit over on the left hand side, but everyone does have to be seated. And if we need to go to overflow, we'll get somebody to move some chairs outside. Thank you. All right, since everyone is seated and it is right at 1.30, I will call this meeting to order. I'd also like to mention, it looks that most of you guys were waiting in line out there, but if you do plan to speak today, we do want to make sure that you have signed in outside. So if you haven't signed in on the iPad outside, you can do that as well. My first order of business is approval of the minutes. We have received as the board the June minutes. Have we had an opportunity to review? And if so, I will entertain a motion. Is that a motion? I think Bob's made a motion to approve the minutes? Yes. Okay. Do we have a second? okay let's get it in when the second if no further discussion will take a vote uh... motion has passed the next item on the agenda is the swearing witnesses so anyone applicants or anyone planning to speak on behalf of any any of these cases needs to stand at this time and be sworn in and if those people coming in are planning to speak please um you could be sworn in at this time as well so if you please raise your right hand and do you swear to tell the whole truth today thank you you can be seated the next thing i will do is sound the agenda so we will run through all of the cases that that have been posted on the agenda, if they have been recommended for approval and there is no one to speak in opposition of those cases, those cases will be heard first on what we like to call the rocket docket. So those things we will move in and out. If the case has been recommended for disapproval, what we will do is hear it on the long docket, on the heard docket. Or if anyone is here to speak in opposition to the case, we want to make sure you have an opportunity to speak as well, So you will be heard on the secondary docket. We do have a full room today, so I will be moving quickly. If anyone needs me to stop, just let me know. When you do have an opportunity to speak, we do have to adhere to certain time limits. And we do want to reiterate that we appreciate the community coming out and speaking, but we do want to make sure we're not repetitious in what we're saying when we talk about any of the cases on the docket. So the first item that I'm showing under variance appeals is PLNBOA 24-84, that's Madden Family LLC number 21, is the applicant present. Okay, this one has been recommended for approval. Is there anyone here in opposition of this particular item? All right, so this item will be heard first. The next item is PLNBOA 24-109 Leon Hines. Is the applicant present? Mr. Leon Hines? That's Mara Trace. Okay. No applicant, we'll check again at the end. The next item is PLNBOA 24-120, Craig Hardin. Is the applicant present? Okay. This one has been recommended for disapproval, so we'll fully hear your case. So you'll be number one on the herd docket. The next item is PLNBOA 24-122, that's the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. Is the applicant present? Thank you. That has been recommended for approval. Is there anyone here to speak in opposition of that item? Okay. So we will be number two on the rocket docket, on the first docket. The next item, a PLN BOA 24-36, Dustin and Lauren Gage. We had already approved the postponement of that item until November 4th meeting. So we will leave that one. The next item, PLNBOA 24-39, the Lexington Islamic Center. Is the applicant present? Okay, we do have a request for this one to be postponed. Again, there's been some significant changes that we have to have new disclosure for. Madam Chair, unless the staff has an objection, if they don't, then I will move for postponement of PLNBOA 24-39, Lexington Islamic Center's request for conditional use permits related to 1240 Armstrong Mill Road and postponed the case until our hearing on November 4th Thank You mr. Gross and Miss Tucker has offered a second so we will open for vote All right, that motion has, am I missing someone? Who are we missing? Clark, Mr. Clark. There we go, the motion has passed. We will hear that on October 14th. Okay. The next item is PLNBOA 24-91 First Alliance Church of Christian and Missionary. Is the applicant present? And this one is continued from last week, so we will hear this one fully. So that will be number two on the herd docket. The next item is PLN BOA 24-94, Armenteros Property Group, LLC. Is that applicant present? Thank you. Is there any opposition for this particular item? No, okay. So that will actually be first. First of all, I'm sure. that item will be heard we will hear that item so this will actually be the first one on our short-term rental group so we'll do that one first I had to add a whole extra docket I have PLN BOA 24-95 Serenia Molina is that applicant present i do understand she has requested a postponement you want to check there's opposition please let's see if anyone's here do we have any opposition to this particular item today in that case i will move for postponement of plnboa 2495 serena molina it's request for a conditional use permit related to 259 malibu drive until our november 4 hearing thank you and miss plumley has offered a second we are ready for vote um i think she requested a postponement to the october 14th meeting if that's acceptable oh i'm sorry what did we say october 14 yes i will amend my motion to october 14. thank you i wasn't listening okay good deal and miss plumley still seconds okay there we go missing someone oh mr gross all right that item has been postponed then pln voa 24-100 booker group investments is the applicant present thank you and this has been recommended for approval or is it anyone here in opposition okay so that will be on the herd docket is it number three Chad it's your job said number three on my herd there we go okay so PLNBOA 24-106 kathy waller is the applicant present is there anyone here in opposition of this item today that's at 33 26 grassmere okay you'll be number two on the str docket then on pln boa 24-108 brennan and suzanne farron is the applicant present It's on 553 Jefferson Street. Oh, over here. Okay, thank you. It has been recommended for approval. Is there any opposition today? Okay. I think that makes you number three on the first docket. Then we have Ellen Harshman, PLNBOA 24-111. Is the applicant present? Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition? Who are? Okay. So we will hear that item. That has been recommended for approval. That will be number four. PLN BOA 24-112, John Workman. Is the applicant present? Okay. That one has been recommended for approval. Is there any opposition to this item? Okay. We will put that number three on the STR, I think. Did I miss that? It should be four? Okay. I was on a row. All right, we have PLNBOA 24-114, the Lexington School. Is the applicant present? Present. Present, okay. This has been recommended for approval. Do we have anyone in opposition today? Okay. So that will make us number four again. I think so. I think it's the third on the- Number three? On the quick docket. Okay. All right, then we have PLNBOA 24-115 Michael Tuttle. Is the applicant present? This has been recommended for approval. Is there any opposition to this item? Okay, makes it number four. we appeal and be only 24-116 sharing newcom is the applicant present and this one actually has been recommended for approval is there any opposition this will be as tr number five i think and then we have peel and be only 24-119 the church in lexington Is the applicant present? Oh, yes. Okay. This has been recommended for approval. Is there any opposition to this item? Okay. I believe that's number five. and lastly but not least PLNBOA 24-121 Patrick Perryman is the applicant present this one's been recommended for approval is there any opposition to this item yes okay that'll still be on the the STR docket All right, let's get back to the beginning, I believe. PLN BOA 24-84 Madden Family LLC, if the applicant will please come forward. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. If you could please state your name for the record. Richard Scott. And you're here representing the Madden Family LLC, number 21? Okay. This has been recommended for approval, and there are three conditions that have been listed. Have you had an opportunity to review those? I have. Okay, and are we okay with those conditions? We are. The board has had an opportunity to review the documents. Do we have any questions of the applicant? And if not, I will entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I move to approve PLNBOA 24-84 Madden Family LLC number 21. We request the variance to increase a maximum level parking from 28 spaces to 50 spaces and reduce the perimeter landscape buffer along the northern boundary of the property from 8 feet to 5 feet in a commercial center B6P zone on property located at 1863 Ploutet place based on staffs recommendations and subject to the three conditions. Thank you. And Mr. Clark has offered to second any other discussion? All right. We will open for vote. Thank you. The motion is passed. Good luck with your project. Thank you. Can we correct Mr. Clark's name, spelling? I don't know what happened there. That's not you, is it? Okay. Sorry, it's bothering me. Okay, now PLN BOA 24-109, Leon Hines. Has that applicant arrived? We're up here, okay. Well, that was recommended for approval. Was there anyone here to speak in opposition? No? And I'm sorry, Tracy, did you want- I was just going to let you know that he had arrived. Well, thank you. So Mr. Hines, great timing. you like to come forward good afternoon first of all i'll let you know that i haven't been sworn in yet okay please raise your right hand and do you swear to tell the whole truth today yes i have thank you and this looks like your item has been recommended for approval and there were two conditions listed regarding construction and necessary permits had you had opportunity to look at those two conditions briefly okay okay do you um can we take a look at them to make sure you're okay with them Okay, yes. Okay. Thank you. Do we have any questions of this applicant? And if not, I'll entertain a motion. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move approval for BOA 24109, Leo Hines. request a variance to the acquired rear yard setback of a through log from 20 feet to 10 feet in order to expand a rear yard deck in a planned neighborhood residential zone r3 on property located at 2112 mara trace with the two conditions so moved thank you and mr Mr. Sturdivant has offered a second. Any other questions, discussion, or we'll open for vote. You have been approved. Good afternoon. Good luck with your project. And then we have item PLNBOA 24-122, that's the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. I think, Brandon, is this the one you're accusing yourself? all right good afternoon please state your name for the record yes good afternoon kyle ray for the kentucky transportation cabinet thank you and this has been recommended for approval and there are three conditions that have been listed have you had opportunity to take a look at those conditions we have okay and are we comfortable with the conditions and approval as stated we are do we have any questions of the applicant if not i will entertain a motion madam chair i recommend approval of pln boa 24-122 kentucky transportation cabinet request for variances to one increase the maximum front yard from 20 feet to 75 feet number two to reduce the perimeter landscape buffer from a double frontage lot from 10 feet to zero feet number three to reduce the usable open space area from 10 feet 10 percent to zero percent and four reduce the usable open space vegetative vegetative area from 10 percent to zero percent in a neighborhood business zone on property located at 1419, 1425, 1433, and 1445 Newtown Center Way, based on the staff's recommendation and subject to the three conditions as listed. Thank you. And Mr. Sturdivant has seconded it. No further discussion. We will take a vote. Good deal. Motion is passed. Thank you. Good luck with the project. We missed you, Brandon. Thank you for coming back. Let me see here. The next item is PLN BOA 24-114. That's the Lexington School. The applicant will please come forward. Good afternoon, please state your name for the record. Luna McCarthy. Say it again please. Luna McCarthy. Luna McCarthy, okay, Ms. McCarthy. This has been recommended for approval and there are three conditions that have been listed. Had you had the opportunity to review the conditions? Yes we have. And are we comfortable with those? We are. Does the board have any questions about this project? I do have a quick question. Since it's very close to residential area, I was just wondering are there loudspeakers involved? You didn't mention that in the application. There is not speakers involved. Okay, there's no sound system at all. No, sir. Okay, I appreciate that, thank you. Thank you. We'll entertain a motion, Ms. Plumlee. Madam Chair, I move approval for BOA 24114 Lexington School request to amend an existing conditional use permit for a school for academic instruction in order to construct an outdoor theater single-family residential r-wensley zone on property located at 1050 lane allen road and 2092 landstill road with as recommended by the staff with the three conditions for approval thank you and mr sturdivant has seconded if no further discussion we'll take a vote Wonderful, the motion is passed. Thank you. Good luck with your project. The next item is PLN BOA 24-115, Michael Tuttle. Good afternoon, I'm Michael Tuttle. Good afternoon. Chair, Jessica Winters here on behalf of the applicant. I did prepare a brief presentation on this application, but that can be skipped in the event that you all don't have any questions and you're leaning toward approval. But if you did have questions or would like some more explanation about the project, I'm prepared to discuss that with you. Okay, thank you. I just don't want to hold you up seeing how busy your docket is today. Well, no, no, we appreciate it. It has been recommended for approval, and there were three conditions that have been listed. Is the applicant okay with those conditions as listed? I am. Okay. Do we have any questions about the particular project? I do not, and unless someone does, I can move for approval. Bob, you have one? A question? I'm just going to move for approval. Go ahead. Let's get it done. madam chair i hereby move for approval of plm boa 24 115 michael tuttle's request for a conditional use to extend the regulations of the r4 zoned portion of the lot 50 feet into the remaining r2 zone portion of the lot in a variance to the group residential project design standards to reduce the required project exterior yard from 20 feet to zero feet within the defined infill redevelopment area and the historic district overlay zone in medium density residential and mixed low density residential zones on property located at 247 North Broadway and 202 Morrow Place based upon the staff's report and the application and subject to the conditions therein. That was some good reading Mr. Gross. Thank you very much. And Mr. Sturtevant has seconded it. No further discussion we will take a vote you want me to catch up let's talk to you anyway yeah that's okay that's okay okay you can slow me down if you need to i saw you're still scrolling yeah okay thank you thank you thank you very much thank you very much Okay. Slow down on the next one, we have a lot of conditions. PLN BOA 24-119, the church in Lexington. The applicant come forward please. Good afternoon. Please state your name for the record. Charlie Hall. And I believe you were sworn in correctly. Mm-hmm. Okay. So this has been recommended for approval, but there are nine conditions that have been listed. Have you had an opportunity to review all nine of those conditions? We have, yeah. Okay. And are we comfortable with all nine of those conditions? All of them except for number eight. Okay. So number eight actually has the bridge access point being widened to the approval of the Division of Engineering and to obtain any state and federal permits. Do you want to tell us a little bit about the project? Because the approval is right now subject to that. Yeah. The issue with number eight isn't the whole condition. It's just the widening of the bridge. The church right now uses the bridge as is. It's a little over 14 feet wide, so even though it is a little thin, again, it's the existing condition that the church has been using without any issues. The church has one service with people coming in at the same time and people leaving at the same time, so there's rarely any conflict on the bridge. The main issue with it is just the added cost and also the permitting with the bridge is a pretty big ask for a church to do. Our justification with that is, as engineers are going to review, they're going to go by Article 19, which is the floodplain regulations, and we didn't see anything in the ordinance that would suggest that a widening is required. Actually, in Section 14 of that, it suggests that existing use can remain as long as it's not altered. so that's our justification in asking mainly just because again it's going to be a big cost to the church to have to widen that if it's not required. Okay, take a look here. And we are increasing by 8,000 square feet? I believe so, yes. Madam Chair. I'm sorry. Okay, since this sounds like it is one we may need actually hear from the staff and from the Division of Engineering, should we go ahead and mark this one as to be heard? I think it's the last one that was to not be heard anyway, so we might as well go ahead. Okay. Yeah, that's fine too. All right. I'm sorry. Come forward. If you're finished with him, I have a question. Michelle Har from the Neighborhood Association. Oh, well, we're not ready for public comment just yet. I'm sorry. Okay, so what we'll do is we will let staff present and specifically regarding the conditions and then we'll move from there. So this has become the first one on the herd. If you take a seat. Thank you. Just a moment. Is that you, Dalton? Yeah. Yes, please. Thank you, Brenda. All right. First time using this, so hopefully I'm not crazy with it. I wasn't going to tell everybody, I wasn't going to tell everybody. That's okay. I just want to get myself a safety net in case I go to the wrong slide. So the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to establish a place of religious assembly and agricultural urban AU and single-family residential 1C zone. On property located at 1136, 1120, and 1250 Higby Mill Road. Council District 9. The property at 1136 Higby Mill Road contains a religious assembly structure that is approximately 3,400 square feet with a 3,400 square foot basement. A single-family detached residential dwelling previously occupied 1220 Higby Mill Road and 1250 Higby Mill Road is an unimproved lot. The three parcels together comprise approximately 6.6 acres, of which 2.1 acres is encumbered by a special flood hazard area, a floodplain, associated with the south Elkhorn Creek that traverses the property. This is the view from Higbee Mill Road. The access point that we're talking about is to the left of this sign. This would be the primary access point for the religious assembly. There is also an access point to where the previous house, the residential structure was. Part of staff's recommendation is that that be removed, that bridge that goes to the other structure. This is the view from Manowar Boulevard. So this is the existing religious assembly structure. You can't really see it from Higbee Mill, so we pulled this picture to give you a context. All right. In 2021, the applicant sought a conditional use permit, and at the time, the board granted the conditional use for two structures and associated parking at 1220 Higbee Mill Road and 1250 Higbee Mill Road. The applicant has now added a third parcel and wishes to build a larger structure of 8,000 square feet on the center lot. with the surrounding parking that will expand out to the western lot and will be connected to the eastern lot. So the proposed structure is here. You have the access point coming through here on 1136. This will connect into this parking area, and the parking will go over here into the western lot as well. Similar to the 2021 request, the existing access point on the eastern lot is too narrow for two-way traffic and will need to be improved engineering standards to accommodate the increased vehicular traffic associated with the church. The congregation plans to continue to hold services on Wednesday at 6 p.m. and Sundays at 10 a.m., and they estimate that the new structure will accommodate approximately 150 participants. So staff recommends approval for the following reasons. Approval of the proposed conditional use should not adversely affect the subject or adjoining nearby properties, provided that all necessary permits and approvals, including a stormwater management plan, are secured prior to the construction and occupancy. Second, the new structure is approximately 2,000 square feet larger than was previously approved by the Board of Adjustment 2021. Thus, it is unlikely the church expansion would create traffic issues in the neighborhood. And three, all necessary public services and facilities are or will be adequate for the proposed use. And then, so the recommendation of approval is made subject to the following conditions. First, that the property shall be developed and operate in accordance with the submitted application materials and site plan, subject to any alterations through the permitting process. Second, all necessary permits and approvals shall be obtained from the divisions of planning, building inspection, and engineering, as well as necessary state and federal agencies. Third, a stormwater management plan shall be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the adopted engineering manuals subject to the acceptance by the Division of Engineering. Fourth, the final configuration of the parking area shall be subject to approval by the Division of Traffic Engineering. Fifth, any outdoor lighting for the parking lot shall meet the requirements of Article 30. Sixth, all three properties shall be consolidated with a minor subdivision plat prior to construction. Seven, and I mentioned this before, the existing unused bridge on 1220 Higby Mill Road shall be removed prior to the occupancy of the new structure. Eight, which is the condition that's in contest right now, the bridge access point currently on 1136 Higby Mill Road shall be widened to the approval of the Division of Engineering and obtain any state and federal permits necessary for approval. and nine of the parking areas shall be paved with spaces delineated and a landscape screened in accordance with the requirements of Article 16 and Article 18 of the zoning ordinance. Thank you, Dalton. Do we have any questions of staff? I do. Can we go back to the aerial, Dalton? The aerial? Yep. It's taken me a few minutes to figure out what's going on. Go back to the PVA aerial. Sorry? The PVA aerial. Oh, the PVA aerial, okay. Okay. Okay, so I know this area pretty well, and it took me a minute to figure out which this was. So starting from, I guess, I'm going to go north, south, east, west, even if that's, I think that is the directional. So the east property, that's where the current building is. Hang on. Yeah, right here you can see the current building. There is essentially a one lane bridge. Yeah, you can see the gray a little bit right there towards the center of where I'm pointing at. That's where the access point is. Okay. That's what staff's proposing to whiten. So the center lot here that I'm now highlighting is where the proposed new structure will be. And then they'll have essentially the parking lot will connect these two lots. and then there's parking over here as well and they will be connected by the parking lot okay so in does the bridge it looks to me like you drive I don't know maybe 10 15 feet until you hit the bridge the bridge crosses what looks like up the creek and then it goes on to the balance of the worth the current parking is that yeah I think I'm reading the topo correctly yeah I mean I think that's the the bridge your primary access point you come in through this on here and you cross the bridge that you go back in and there's parking back here for the existing church okay and then let's fast forward let's move slides forward to the the site plan. Okay, so would you put your red button pointer where the bridge kind of is? Where the what? Where the location of the bridge is now. It's the red one. Double click it. There. It's testing you Dalton. I did not know how to use this thing, so. Okay, and that bridge is? Essentially it's large enough for one car. They said 14 feet wide, so yeah, I mean, standard car, what, nine, yeah. So and given the amount of, given that they're going to have 150 people and that's a lot of people coming at one time, coming, going, and then also some considerations just about if there's a, certainly don't hope there will be, but in case of emergency, making sure there's adequate space for emergency vehicles to be able to access the property and get back there are some of the considerations for why staff was proposing to widen and there's no secondary entrance to the property access point no there's the there's the bridge that goes to the the previous residential or the residential structure but we're proposing to remove that we would want them to remove that bridge there would just be at this point one way in and one way out for the access point would that be the way it is after it's constructed yeah but it'd be wider it'd be only one access point but yeah wide enough for the fire trucks and emergency services they typically in a commercial entrance isn't as narrow as they want is is usually 20 feet and that's what the fire department asked for as well i think another consideration is this is the access crosses a floodplain, right? So this property is not accessible via Manowar, right? So you can only get to it from Higbee Mill. So if there is a flooding issue and the fire department needs to get to the church, which is a community facility, there's concern about them crossing what was built as a bridge for just a single family, probably single family home and I guess the small church, but not for probably not for a fire truck to cross yeah that's all my questions madam chair thank you do we have i think you covered traffic so i was like wait i thought you were here that's okay that's fine okay thank you and i think we did have someone with public comment My name is Michelle Haar. I'm the president of the Higbee Mill Neighborhood Association. We've had a longstanding, wonderful relationship with the St. Andrew's Orthodox Church and would like to support them in this petition. We would like to make a couple of comments. The parking lots will be up at near Manowar level, and so any lighting will fall down on the home that is in front of the expansion area. And that's Matt and Christina White's home. Oh, yeah, there's Matt. And so we would like to request, and I don't know if this is the right time, but we would like to request that any lighting be directed so that it's not shining on their house. And the only other thing that we're concerned about, he mentioned flooding. Any additional paved area would, of course, tend to exacerbate the existing flooding on the South Alcorn Creek. We would just like to make sure that that can be mitigated either through retention or permeable paving or something that whatever they would like to do to make sure that that doesn't make things worse. Okay, great. And that is one of the items, one of the conditions listed. So just that, you know, otherwise we are totally in support of their petition. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. We appreciate that. And the lighting is mentioned here as a condition as well, so we'll let the applicant address that. Was there anyone else before? Oh, yes. Go ahead, please. Hi. My name is Matthew White. I live at 1260 Higby there. I don't want to say anything against the previous speaker there. I don't know if I'm in 100% agreement with everything in support. A few concerns I do have is the traffic, and I know we said we're trying to widen it, but there might not be a lot more traffic. If we are adding to the building and there's more people going, I don't see how that's not a lot more that we wouldn't need to widen or do anything for safety. and then even they do have events there that I know brings a lot of traffic to that area even that yesterday and the day before they have a festival and I know that not my property but the property right next to us there's 50 75 cars parked there so if there is more people I mean it is more traffic and then I'm also concerned about the flooding as well like she was saying with the just to make sure that everything was okay because I know that creek kind of gets crazy and it's scared me a few times when there's no parking or anything up there. So I just want to make sure that that's considered and there's a plan for that as well. Okay, thank you. Thank you. The applicant, please. I have a few pictures of that bridge. Hopefully they're a little clearer than street view. As you can see, I mean, it is relatively narrow. It's 14 feet. Again, though, this is how it's been used. They haven't had any issues. Also mentioned there is some room to pull off. So on the occasion that there is two-way traffic, there's room to have cars take turns. One thing I want to respond to is they're not necessarily adding more people to the site. The church has kind of grown to its capacity, so that's why they need a bigger building. So the people that are already coming are going to be the same number that's going to be there. Actually, it makes it safer that now they have a place to park instead of a long Higbee Mill, which happens sometimes. um again the issue we have with number eight is just the permitting of a new bridge the the cost and time and again the cost of a bridge whether it be the structural design or the actual construction of it it's a lot for a church to fund and then going back to article 19 we just didn't see anything in the ordinance that would require it there are plenty of arguments for why that'd be great, but we didn't see anything that would actually require the church to have to do that. To respond to some of the community, I think we addressed the floodplain mitigation and lighting as part of the conditions, and it'll definitely be taken into account. We've done everything we can to stay out of the floodplain. That's why the parking lot has kind of an odd shape. We don't want to do anything to affect it. And then they do have events every now and then. They can correct me if I'm wrong. I'm sure they're relatively rare. It's not something that they have all the time. But again, they're having them currently, so it's not going to change regardless of whether the bridge gets widened or not. Okay. Okay. But it does appear that the Division of Engineering and Fire Safety would require the bridge to be widened. I don't know about engineering. You can correct me if I'm wrong. I think they're more worried about how effective the bridge is, how it's maintained, if it needs to be given attention. i think they're more worried about that than the actual width of it um fire i'm not sure about i know that'd probably be nice but i don't know if it's required um excuse me are um and i may have missed this are you are you an engineer with doorbread i'm a designer yeah okay um has you know whether or not you have the captains met you guys out there at the bridge or anything with the fire department have you guys had any i don't believe you have no you think it would behoove you to maybe continue this until next month and then meet with them and see if you can work through that issue versus potentially getting approval with that condition in it today um george do you like to comment on that yeah oh please uh come up yeah and he'll need to be sworn in as well yeah okay so have you not been sworn in no let's raise your right hand do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth today yes i do thank you please state your name for the record My name is George Natour. So, Brendan, back to your question. I do believe we can meet with the fire department and see if... Could you speak into the microphone, please? Yes, I do believe we can meet with the fire department and the engineers at the bridge to take a look at it. You know, one thing is that bridge construction is going to take us about three to four months to do if we were to tear that bridge down. and that would refrain us from going to church. So, you know, essentially we want to keep that access point available to us at all times. Yeah, I understand your concern. So what I would recommend is we continue this until next month, give you an opportunity to meet with staff and also meet with the engineers and see if you can come up with something that satisfies them and you. and then come back. And I think the, and then that would also give us, maybe if we could, from the staff, as this was approved, when was the last condition? 21? And maybe we'd have an opportunity to look at what was discussed then also. So with your permission, I will move for a continuance for 30 days. Yes. Okay. Unless anyone objects and wants to vote today. Okay. So with that being said, I will move for a continuance of PLNBOA 24-119, the church in Lexington, Inc., regarding 1136-1220 and 1250 Higmey Mill Road. So moved. Oh, sorry. Till the October date, which is the 14th. October 14th. So moved. I have a question for staff. So it says the three parcels together compromise 6.6 acres of which 2.1 acres is encumbered by a special flood hazard area flood plain associated with the South Elkhorn Creek that traverses the properties. So should that be looked at as well? Well they are trying to avoid any development near the flood plain. But the part that does cross the flood plain is the access point in the bridge. We have looked at where the FEMA floodplain ends and they are 25 feet outside of that in terms of making improvements. So we feel like they are honoring the edge of the floodplain in terms of their parking lot and proposed structure. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Ms. Plumlee has seconded it. So we will vote on the continuance. And then one last thing if I could, Madam Chair. I would recommend that the church talk with this gentleman up front who's next to you and see if you guys can address his concerns that he may have. But I hope you guys can work this out and we'll see you next month. Thank you. Thank you. All right, those were the easy ones. Yeah. So our next item, our first item on the actual docket is PLNBOA 24-120. That's Craig Harden. This has been recommended for disapproval, so we will allow staff to present first. So the applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the required front yard setback from five foot to zero foot within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a mixed low density residential R2 zone on properties located at 512 and 514 Oldham Court in Council District 3. So, let me see if I can still learn that. There we go. Oh. There we go. So you see the highlighted, the yellow and blue highlighted properties here are the two properties in question. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing structures on both lots. You can see there's one, there's two. The applicant plans to construct a two-story, 2,600 square foot, two-family dwelling on both lots. Both properties require a variance for the front yard due to a proposed eight-foot front porch projection that encroaches into the front yard setback. So this is the plan for 512 Oldham Court. the proposed parking area to the rear of the proposed structures will accommodate seven total parking spaces and we'll have a shared access easement for both properties 512 will have four parking spaces so as you can see they've got the parking spaces here in the back of the property here's the access easement 514 is over here off and then here's the front of the property where the setback is being requested and then 514 oldham again the shared access point running up the middle here three parking spaces in the back and in the porch here in the front that's requiring the variance staff recommends disapproval for the following reasons one the applicant has not provided a sufficient justification to meet the requirements of article 7 of the zoning ordinance or KRS 100 point 243. There do not appear to be special circumstances that are unique to the subject property that do not generally apply to land in the general vicinity or in the same zone that justified the need for the variance. The applicant has not provided sufficient information to determine the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance will result in an unnecessary hardship or deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their land. The zoning ordinance provisions for a projection for the residential development in the defined infill and redevelopment area established by Article 15-7 does not have to be a porch, and there are other options that they can use for projections that would not require a variance. The applicant is providing parking that is also not required by the zoning ordinance in the rear yard, which is resulting in the primary structure in the front porch needing a variance. And that's it for staffs. Okay. Do we have any questions of staff? We will give the applicant an opportunity. Thank you Madam Chair, I'm Dick Murphy. I'm pleased today to be representing Craig Hardin who is with me in the front row. He and his wife Carmella are the owners of the property. Cameron Hardin who also works in the company is sitting in the second row with me. We do not have with us today Paul Lee our architect. He sent his regrets. He could not be here, but we do have an architect involved in the project. I need to give a couple things to the overhead operator, and at that time, Craig is going to hand out a handout to you all, if that's all right, Madam Chairman. Thank you. As Mr. Belter mentioned to you, we are requesting a variance in the front yard setback for the purpose of a porch. The variance we're requesting is from 5 feet to 0 feet. I want to explain that a little bit. The front plane of our buildings does not need a variance. The front plane of our buildings is eight feet back from the right-of-way line. So we are asking this solely for the purpose of having a porch. We're not doing this because we need a projection. We could do another projection, as the staff mentioned, without it. We're doing it because we specifically want a porch, because a porch is the one architectural detail which seems to be on the majority of the houses in this Columbia Heights neighborhood. Also I wanted to point out to you too that it's a little unusual. We're asking for a variance from 5 feet to 0 feet. However we will still be set back at least 2 and a half feet from the sidewalk. On today's subdivisions, the right of way usually ends at the edge of the sidewalk. In this subdivision, which was subdivided 111 years ago in 1913, the right of way goes two and a half feet beyond the sidewalk into the front yards of the houses on this block. So even though we're asking for a variance down to zero feet, we'll still have two and a half feet of grass and green space between the front of the porch and the roadway. So it's a little unusual that way. And the sidewalk, excuse me. I brought up this slide, this is page one in your handout, because this is our notification map. But on this map, the whole map shows about 97 properties. One of the specific circumstances which is unusual to this property is the small size of the lots. I'll figure this out eventually. Our properties are 512 and 514 Oldham Court. It's interesting, Oldham Court is not part of Oldham Avenue because you can see there's an offset up here. Oldham Court is one block long. 512 and 511 are our properties. These six properties right here are very unusual because they are the smallest lots in the subdivision. If you look around these other 97, there's two other little ones up here, up on Oldham Avenue. But other than that, all other 97 lots, most of them are twice as big as these. And if you go to my next page on page two of my handout you can see why this is the hundred eleven year old plaque filed in the clerk's office and current Avenue is now Oldham Court Locust Avenue is now Park Avenue Columbia Avenue is up here but Mr. and Mrs. Hardin have purchased two half lots because they were half lots when they purchased them 20 years ago. They were half lots probably 75 years ago when the houses were built. That's because a hundred years ago when you did a subdivision plat you could sell half a lot or a piece of a lot and that's what's happened here. So these lots that used to run from Curran Avenue to Locust or Oldham Court to Park were subdivided probably 80-85 years ago into two separate lots. And they're smaller. That gives you less room to accommodate what you need to accommodate on these lots. So that's one of the special circumstances that apply to these lots that do not apply to others in the neighborhood. If you could go to the next page of my handout, I wanted to show you the area a little bit. And here I'm trying to illustrate to you what the ownership pattern is here on Oldham Court. I've put in blue. I tried to get close to the UK blue as I could. And blue is all UK-owned property on this road. You can see Oldham Court runs from Columbia Avenue down. And if you've been out there, it sort of stubs into SportsCenter Drive. There's bollards in there, so you cannot drive a car from Oldham Court onto Sports Center Drive. You can walk. You can take a bicycle or scooter or something like that and make it through, but they've blockaded it. UK has, so there's no vehicular access. So Oldham Court is a pretty low traffic, very low traffic roadway because there's nowhere to go here, down here. But UK owns of, there are nine lots that have an address on Oldham Court, starting here with Hardin's property and the one across the street going down. Of those nine lots, four of them are owned by UK. This lot over here is vacant. This lot, 5, I think that's 5, 518 is vacant. UK recently tore down a house that they had purchased there. The one down south of that at 520 is a house UK is now using as what they call an auxiliary building. We think it's the emergency services headquarters. And most importantly right across the street from this property at 505 Avenue is a house which is owned by UK. They've purchased it and they're using it as an office. It's called the biological safety building and I'm not sure I want to know what the biological safety building does but it's across the street. But my point is UK has been purchasing properties on Oldham Court and moving up this way. The ones in Tan are owned by other owners. All property on Oldham Court is owned by people who do not live there it's all rental housing what's left and in the purple up here I have shaded in the properties which have been purchased in the last few months by a company called Wyatt and properties LLC they purchased the one on the opposite side of Oldham Court they purchased all three on the lot frontage on Columbia between Oldham Court and Park Avenue they've demolished three of those four now and they're in the process of demolishing the fourth one. We don't know what's going to go on there, but somebody, one owner has consolidated those, has purchased those properties, obviously plans to do a project on it. So we're sandwiched between the University and I forgot to point out on the opposite side in SportsCenter Drive, that's what I call the dormitory wall. There's a set of five-story new dormitories built right up a foot off the sidewalk along SportsCenter Drive. If you've ever been out there, that's the dominant feature. There's all those dormitories on the other side of SportsCenter Drive. But we're sandwiched between UK and whatever is going to happen on these properties that front on Columbia Avenue. Again, you can see the small size of these lots compared to the width, and excuse me, the depth especially of the other lots in the neighborhood. If we go on to the next page here, we just showed you an aerial, which is much like the staff had, showing what's going on. The staff, this isn't projecting very well. I think the one in your handout is better than that. But again, here's 512, here's 514, the one in the Hardin Zone. own. Here's 505, the one UK owns. There we go. Here is the, this is a new duplex, which I'll show you in a minute across the street. And these are three of the four lots that have recently been purchased. This PVA photo shows them as demolished. This one, the last one down here, shows that one will soon be demolished. I'd like to switch from that handout to the pictures at this point for a moment and if we could show you don't have these in your handout but these are the pictures of the area I wanted to show you on this one I'm standing in front of the hardened property on the corner looking at those three lots that have been demolished recently this shows you two things this shows you the good size of that lot that whoever has purchased for future development right next to the hardened property which is right here but also shows you something else. It shows you the porches on each of those houses on the other side of Columbia Avenue. And I just point those out because most all the houses in the neighborhood of that vintage have a front porch. That's the dominant architectural feature. And as you all know, architects, I've learned through the years, architects, when they're building something new, want to echo a dominant architectural feature in the neighborhood. They don't want to copy it, but they want to do something which is in keeping with what is there. Going to the second picture there, this is a picture of the third house which has been purchased. And this is actually, I took this picture a couple weeks ago. It's now under demolition right now. But it shows you this is a two-story building. The Hardin's plan to be building two-story buildings. has a front porch, which is that, again, neighborhood feature on here. It was obviously remodeled at some point, added a dormer in the back, but it's about the same type of scale and size that the Hardens are proposing on there. But that is being demolished right now by someone else. The third next picture, we just show you the streetscape of Oldham Court across the street from the Harden property. This is the newer duplex which I mentioned to you. I'll have another picture of that in a minute. This was done several few years ago, immediately across the street. This next house is the one that UK owns. That's the biological safety building that UK owns. Going down the street, you can see the five-story dormitories that UK has built on SportsCenter Drive. There. Going to the next picture, again this is a picture, this is 200 feet from the Hardin property. This lot in front, this is Oldham Court right here. This is the vacant lot owned by UK. There's SportsCenter Drive and you can see these five story dormitories one foot behind the sidewalk located on SportsCenter Drive. There's a series of dormitories. This is one of them, there's three or four on that side of the Sports Center Drive. Going to the next picture, this is a picture of the duplex which is directly across the street from the Hardin property. I show that because I want to show you an example of newer development that has been done on Oldham Court and then I'm going to show you what the Hardin's plan on doing it there in a minute. This is directly across the street. This is a duplex, conforms to all requirements, has about 10 parking spaces in the rear of the property. As to give you an example of the comparison of what Mr. and Mrs. Hardin are going to do on the property, this property which is owned by somebody else, the Hardin's owned property on Waller Avenue as well. this same building was built next to their property on Waller Avenue as well. So when the Hardin's built their new building on Waller Avenue, I want to go to the next picture and show you what they built. And I'll show you this because this is again a two-family house. The configuration, this is 202 Waller Avenue. We have a house, a building similar to that I just showed you immediately next door, which was there when this house was built. And the Hardins engaged Paul Lee, an architect, who is a residential architect in Lexington. Paul does million-dollar houses and going on down. He's worked with the Hardins for many years. I think this has a lot more architectural interest and adds a lot more interest and vitality to Waller Avenue than does the property next door. I'm not trying to run down the other property next door. It's conforming to all requirements. But I give you this as an example of what the Hardens have done, what they have built, because I'm going to show you a rendering in a minute of what they plan on building on this property. If we go back to your handout here on page 5, if we could go back to the handout on page 5, I ask Mr. Lee to do a surrendering for your interest of what the house might look like if we don't get a variance versus what it would look like if we can get a variance. This is the elevation without a front porch. It's I think an attractive design. We'd probably have to do to get the projection we'd have to have to do a little roof over each of those stoops there, you know, three foot by three foot roof over each of the stoops, but it does have projections on either side and conforms to your requirement. That's what could be built without a variance. About the same setback or perhaps a little close a little closer to to oldham court and we'd like to show you the last slide which is the uh or the next page which is the rendering mr lee had done for us for the building that could be built on this property we could build two buildings like this one on each lot these are two family homes we have a porch here which is eight feet wide which does project into the setback the five-foot setback requirement the plane of this building is eight feet back from the property line this is zero feet back from the property line but as I mentioned to you there's still two and a half feet between the front of this and when we get to the sidewalk so I'm doing this for two reasons. One is to show the additional architectural interest and design that we can have if we can have a front porch on the property compared to if we can't have a front porch on the property. And I'm showing you, I showed you, some people say this is just a picture, you won't do this, but I showed you what the Hardin's have done on Waller Avenue to show you that they really do build in accordance to what their architect designs and they they do this is mainly student housing but their student housing is designed to try to be compatible to the architectural style in the area now we do have a letter of support which is the next page in your handout from the lowenthal's which own 516 oldham oldham court right next door and mr. mrs. lowenthal saying their letter said what Mr. Craig Harden is proposing far surpasses the two existing buildings that are on his property which are outdated and not appropriate for today's modern dwellings. I have one request to Mr. Harden is that he consider installing a privacy fence on our shared property line of at least six feet in height and Craig has agreed to do that. So we have support from our next our neighbor on here, but I want to just tell you a little bit more about why we feel the porch is important on this and also the fact that this is not about parking. The staff in their staff report said, I guess this is probably the key sentence, said that the applicant is providing parking that is not required by these ordinance in the rear yard which is resulting in the primary structure and front porch requiring a variance. We are showing, as Mr. Butcher mentioned to you, two duplex buildings which will have 16 people living in them total. Not per building, eight per building, but 16 in both buildings. 16 people will be living there. We're showing seven parking spaces. As you all know, the ordinance was amended a couple years ago on the parking requirements. It used to be you had to have nine-tenths of a space per bedroom, which would have resulted in a requirement of 15 parking spaces for this development. The ordinance was amended because the trend is away from not requiring an amount. They want to have less parking in the areas. They let the owner decide how many parking spaces they actually need. In this case, we're showing seven. and we feel we need the seven parking spaces to handle the people who will be living there. But the number of, we're not doing this variance to get more or less parking. We will have the same number of parking spaces regardless of whether we have a front porch or not. We're asking for this because we feel a front porch is important. As I mentioned to you, our architect feels strongly that the one architectural feature common in this area is front porches. He wants to supply a front porch to keep some of the character of the existing Columbia Heights neighborhood. We want it also because it provides an additional outdoor living area for our residents who can go on the front porch and it activates the streetscape. Activation is a big as a word I learned through the last comprehensive plan here is that the Planning Commission wants our buildings to be activated and that is not to have a sterile blank wall with unmovable windows up against the street but to have activity areas where you can see people coming and going where people can sit on the porch where they can say hi to people walking by. That's what front porches do is they activate the streetscape here. We would like to be able to do this on this property. The, as I said, it's, it echoes the heritage of Columbia Heights, it provides sheltered outdoor living space, and it activates the, the property. We are having to remove the buildings. Craig has owned these buildings for 22 years. Craig and his wife have owned these buildings for 22 years. They are functionally obsolete. They have foundation problems in both buildings, so it would be an extreme expense to use the existing buildings as the base for any new construction. They're going to have to be removed and replaced. We're removing them and replacing them with something we feel is in scale with what has been in the neighborhood. think it's totally in scale with that other building that's being demolished right now but that's an example of what has been in the Columbia Heights area. In order to get a variance we have to show some special or unique circumstances and I probably didn't explain these in the application I had very well but our circumstances which are special to this property which are not involved in all properties in this neighborhood which is the statutory requirement as I mentioned is that these are shallow lots they're the smallest lots in the neighborhood we're sandwiched between UK which is moving up holding court from the south and the new development which is immediately adjacent to us to the north we have still have two and a half feet between the sidewalk and the front of the property. Our next-door neighbor does support us on this and I think from what I've shown you is that the Hardin's are the our property owners who care what their buildings look like. They're asking you for this variance which will be more costly to them to build a front porch, but I think it'll be important to the neighborhood and I think if there's other redevelopment in the area I think this could be a precedent which is shown for how that redevelopment ought to be designed so we feel very strongly that this variance is justified this variance would be good for the neighborhood it meets the legal requirements and I think it's something that after it's built you You will drive by and you will see that it was done the way we said it was going to be done and it's a good addition to this neighborhood. I have given you some findings as the very last page in my handout. Of course, the staff has recommended disapproval. It's my duty to bring you some findings of approval which meet the statutory requirements. I'm not going to go over those with you because that's what I've gone over just now and what I'm telling you. I do mention in number six that this is in the infill area, and in the infill area, your ordinance does give you a little more leeway to grant a variance in the infill area, which allows development compatible with the existing pattern of the neighborhood. What we're trying to do is do something modern, which does meet the pattern of the existing neighborhood. lot more so than other institutional buildings that UK might build here or a larger development which is going to go on next to us. So we thank you very much for hearing us out on this and we obviously hope you'll recommend approval or vote for approval of this and we'd be happy to answer any questions you all might have. Craig is here who can answer questions for you as well. Mr. Murphy, let me ask you this question. you probably know the answer very quickly. Why can't you move the building back five feet and take a little of the parking space? Yeah, we would, to move the building back five feet, we would lose at least one or two more parking spaces. We are well below what the ordinance would have required, ordinance would have required, as I said, was 15 parking spaces. We feel having seven will probably work with the 16 people that are here. I'd note the single duplex across the street from us has 10 or 11 parking spaces in the backyard. We feel we have minimized that. We do need to have some parking available. We have three for one of the houses and four for the other. We have to, the buildings have to be the size to accommodate what's going in with the bedrooms, bathrooms, kitchens, laundry facilities that will be going in there. So we can't really reduce the size of the building. To push it back would lose anywhere between one to three parking spaces. Do you have seven parking places behind each of the buildings? No, there's four behind 512, there's three behind 514. So we have a total on both lots of seven. Of seven. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Mr. Murphy? Yes, sir. On page six of your handout, can we throw that back up on the screen? Is your client committed to build that if this gets approved? You kind of danced around a little bit during your testimony. Allstate, Craig isn't up at the microphone. He just said yes. Okay. Other questions of the applicant? Yeah. Does the street have permitted parking? The street? Pardon? Does not have permit parking. Permit parking? Mr. Harden, do you? No, I'm sorry. All that, Mr. Keefer, he wants to answer any while I'll let him get up here. And so how many students are you planning on putting in the duplex? Well, there'd be four per side, so it'd be, it'd be, it's going to be townhouse style, so there'd be eight per, per building. Okay. And then you'd have seven parking spaces per building or seven for both buildings? Seven for both. So four on one side and three on the other. But you'd have 16 students in there? Correct. Okay. The new requirement is zero parking. Right. I got that. And also, does this align like with the other properties as far as the setback goes along that street? There are no other properties as you face it to the left. And then on the right, the existing property is Mr. Lowenthal, so the answer is no. I believe it was originally 20 feet. Thank you. He's the one that wrote the letter. Thank you. Other questions of the applicant? What is the usual? I know we've discussed this before, but this might be a question for staff. But typically, I know we just saw one where there was a fence that was next door to a sidewalk. What is the preferable distance to set back? I know there's what Mr. Murphy's proposing, but normally is it two, three, five feet? A front yard fence. Well, fence is where they abut a sidewalk. The preference is for that to be three feet back. if it's going to be up to six feet tall. Usually we see that in the side yard. Front yard fences can only be four feet tall, so they can get closer to a sidewalk. What's important, and I'm just reiterating what I know from our pedestrian planner, is that there's a what's called a shy zone. As you walk down the sidewalk, you are only likely to be at the edge of the sidewalk if there's not something directly adjacent, so that you can, as you walk, your arms move and you feel comfortable. If something is too close to the sidewalk, then that shy zone is occupied by something, and then, for instance, the shrubs or trees in the front there might, as they grow, encroach on the sidewalk some, and then people are pushed further from the edge of the sidewalk to the middle and then beyond. So let's keep that in mind. If I may, are you referring to the fence requested by Mr. Lowenthal? No, no, no. I was more gauging against this. You've got the three-foot sidewalk, and then you've got that two-and-a-half-foot setback that's already there, and you're talking about the structure starts at that two-and-a-half feet. And I know normally if there's a fence, you know, a fence you can see through or, you know, might have vegetation or whatever, but this is a pretty hard line. i'm wondering how that compares to that and so okay thanks other questions of the applicant before we allow public comment okay thank you i believe we had a couple of people here didn't we okay please come to the podium did we just have one okay it's all yours please state your name for the record I'm Kate Savage and I live on Columbia Avenue. Thank you. And I've lived there for 35 years. And I've seen my neighborhood change in that time. I am familiar with Mr. Harden. We've gone toe-to-toe on numerous things over the years. And I've almost given up at this point in terms of trying to save what was really a nice middle-class neighborhood. It now is really a student ghetto. I guess it's a question of how you spin things. Let me talk about the porch. These houses need porches because they've paved the backyards, and the backyards are full of cars, and so the kids have nowhere to party. So they party on the porch, and they party in the front yard, and they put loudspeakers on the porch, and they create nothing but an enormous disturbance for those of us that actually live there and keep a regular 9 to 5 schedule and like to sleep at night. That's the purpose of the porch. These two shallow lots, as has been repeatedly pointed out, are small, and yet they are trying to put a gallon of water into a pint-sized jug. more crowding. Sixteen students, young people, with seven parking spaces. This is lunacy. They all will have a car. They all will have friends that sleep over. There is no parking on Columbia Avenue. One side you can only park after five o'clock at night, and the other side you can't park at all. Oldham Court is a dead-end street. It's already littered with cars, this needs to be thought through. There's low traffic on Columbia Court because it's a dead end, and it seems to me, I'm not quite sure, but it looked to me in the plans as if the same access would be used by both properties to get to the parking behind each of the buildings. So you're going to have 16 cars plus their friends coming and going down that one strip that seemed to run between the two properties and act as their access point. I think that the house that's being knocked down now, that solid, sturdy-looking brick house that we saw an image of, it was actually the rabbi, the UK representative of the Jewish community and his, I think, eight children lived in that property. It's a big property and it's, to my way of thinking, a shame that these houses just disappear and are replaced with vinyl boxes, let's face it. That's a pretty fancy-looking arrangement that Mr. Hardin plans, but for the most part they don't actually look like that. They really are a detriment to the neighborhood and those of us that have an asset in our property. Thank you. Thank you. Sir? Hi there. My name is Charles Height. I'm on Aurora Avenue. I'm originally here to speak on another issue later on, but I want to come to the defense of Mr. Murphy and Mr. Hardin. I was at the house that this lady just spoke about very often, almost every Sabbath on holidays. That was indeed the Rabbi's house. But the development they're proposing is not part of the development that's tearing down the old Chabad house. You all granted permission and the Chabad house has since moved to Heilsford. So I do want to speak into what they said that this is a neighborhood full of active front porches and your comprehensive plan used the word activation. It's appropriate for a mostly student residential neighborhood now. Neighborhoods change. When you live that close to the university, a growing university, your neighborhood can be eventually overtaken by student housing, and that's what's happened here. I also want to speak on behalf of Mr. Hardin and Mr. Murphy. I know that everything they put their fingers on is quality work. Mr. Hardin is already committed to building the rendering that his architect showed you there. So I don't think you have any word or any reason to doubt his word. I highly encourage you all to pass this amendment. Thank you so much. Thank you. Was there anyone else? Did staff like to address anything different? applicant like to come forward and address anything from the public comment we go back to page three of my handout on there just needed to point out to you that on Oldham Court there are as I said nine properties that have addresses on Oldham Court either side other than the Hardin's two properties there are only three residential properties left on Oldham Court only three you can see the ones on in tan this is the sort of newer duplex which we pointed out that its companion was built on Waller Avenue this is a older house the Lowenthal house is here which they have written in support those three and the Hardin's two properties are the only remaining residential UK has two of the old houses which they're you on this lot and on this lot which they're using until the houses can't be used anymore or they they find a bigger use to put on the property this is the five hot lots here are student housing there is no owner occupied housing on Oldham Court we have to deal with the neighborhood as it exists today not as it existed 25 or 30 years ago it's not a question of parking because whether the variances the variance is going to determine whether we can have a porch on the front the parking in the rear which is not excessive at all it's very small amount of parking for this area we for both Both lots together, all the units together, will have seven parking spaces, which is much less than others in this area have in the backyards. Again we feel that there's been discussion about this is too many units to come in here. Well, we think this is a small, modest increase in density for property which is 50 feet away from UK property or across the street. But it's more important. It's about 200 feet down to the dormitories on SportsCenter Drive and all the bike trails and walking trails that UK has through its property. So it's ideally suited for the residents here to go to UK and utilize those trails. But I would think if UK got this property and caught up, it would be much more intense than what we're proposing to you. We feel this is a reasonable use of this property. And we think we're asking for the porch because we think the porch will make it a much nicer use, both for our property and for the community and the area around here. Thank you very much. Thank you. Any more questions of the applicant? All right. Do we have further discussion we'd like to have? Motions or recess to discuss motions? Well, Madam Chair, I'm going to just make a few just comments. And this is first to, yeah, the city passed a zoning ordinance that said we no longer have minimum parking. and at the time it was passing one of my concerns was that there's not gonna be enough parking because this is a city that drives and students that go to UK a lot of them don't live in Lexington permanently they come back and forth between their home counties where they live and they got to put their car somewhere so I I think that the seven spaces they are proposing is not enough parking I can't imagine taking it down to four spaces but it's seven spaces that those cars won't be parking on Columbia Avenue so that that's my one comment the second one is is for a long time now the city has said we want infill and redevelopment and we've taken all the easy stuff and we've torn down the tobacco barns and we built the apartments there but we're running out of the easy stuff and so if the city really wants and the community wants more infill and redevelopment we're gonna see more of these type of projects coming in front of us that are difficult and they're not easy and people don't like them but that's what we voted our elected officials to say that we want in general right now the Kentucky Housing Corporation says Lexington needs 22,000 dwelling units today so we have a big shortage of housing in the city so with With all that being said, I would be comfortable moving forward with this only because they've committed to build the building that they've shown. The building that they've shown has a porch. I think it's better to have a porch than no porch. And I think that the seven parking spaces as proposed is not over parked. So that's just my feeling. And I agree, it's a shallow lot. They're hard to do. You know, I always tell people if you've got small lots, design them so you don't need a variance. easier but we're here today with it so with all that said if the board was so inclined I'd be willing to support a motion for approval but like I said it'd be based upon the applicants affirmative statement that they would build what they showed that they were going to build and not build a box with no front stuff so that's all I have to say thank you yes Mr. Clark yes Mr. Mr. Brose, I agree with you up to a point. The city wants more housing, but I don't think in their proposal for all the need for housing is not necessarily student housing. I think it's housing that is going to families rather than continuing the process of finding housing for students. I'll rebut that in a second. Okay. but i do agree with you that probably this is this is worth worth looking at and uh... it it would be uh... i think e one of the things that concerns me is the parking situation uh... and uh... i don't know what in the world you're gonna do about people who come here and and have everybody has cargill at sixteen cars to park and where in the world but the problem is that's not the issue that we're dealing with and we can't all of a sudden come up with a new problem, which we face all the time. And so we have to look at the ordinance, we have to look at the application. So I would agree with Mr. Gross that there's probably reason to approve this. Thank you. Other comment? I would add to the comment I'd be inclined to agree with you as well, because the fact of the matter is it could build the property. I mean the project could move forward just not as attractively. It could also move forward with less parking. So if we have an opportunity to allow it to move forward and also look nicer and add more value I'd be acclaimed to agree with that as well. That being said, you ready? Well, I think we'll need a recess for a couple minutes while I talk with legal and then I'll be ready. I thought you were legal. Not today. Not today? Not today. All right, five minutes. You only get five minutes, Brandon. We have a brief recess for five minutes. We will return. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm not going to die. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to make a little bit more of a little bit more. Thank you. You can be seated. All right. We are officially back in order, in session. Mr. Gross, do you have a motion? I do. Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLNBOA 24-00120 Craig Harden's request for a variance to reduce the required front yard setback from 5 feet to 0 feet within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a mixed low density residential zone on property located at 512 and 514 Oldham Court based upon the application the testimony that was given to us today and these findings the variance request will not adversely affect the essential character of the neighborhood because many of the surrounding residential properties contain front porches as a dominant architectural feature so the proposed porch will be consistent with the character of the neighborhood further the proposed porch will help activate the neighborhood landscape the variance will not negatively impact the public health safety or welfare or otherwise create a nuisance because the porch will have over two feet of landscape buffer between the edge of the porch and the closest sidewalk which will lessen the impact on pedestrians the variance is also justified by the special circumstances of the land and will not unreasonably circumvent the zoning requirements because these two lots on which the variance will apply are shallower than many of the neighboring neighboring lots because of the time the subdivision was platted half lots were allowed the half lot size greatly reduces the available space for building a front porch without needing a variance the approval is made subject to the following conditions the site shall be developed in accordance with the submitted application materials in site plan and the renderings presented today to the board on September 9, 2024. All necessary permits and approvals shall be obtained by the Division of Building Inspection prior to completion of construction. The applicant shall install a six-foot privacy fence along any neighboring property lines. So moved, are those conditions okay? A point of clarification about the fence. The fence was intended from the neighboring property to screen the parking area in the back. We did not intend to bring it all the way toward the street. I can revise that. So all necessary permits and sorry. Condition three, the applicant shall install a six foot privacy fence along any neighboring property lines to screen the parking area. Agreed. That work, Ms. Wade? Yeah, okay. So moved. Thank you. We have a second. I'll second. Sorry, thank you, Mr. Clark. Clerk today, Mr. Clark. All right, any further discussion? If not, we'll go ahead and take a vote. okay the motion has passed good luck with your project let's see here the next item on the agenda is pln boa 2491 first alliance church of christian and missionary this one was actually continued from last month the applicant oh you you want to present first. Thank you Chair Carter. We do have just an additional sheet of information for the board at your place today which is a revised site plan that the church supplied to the staff on late Thursday but we did not have an opportunity to meet again as a staff to review the site plan in relationship to the requested application i do think one item that they mentioned in their communication to the staff was their concern about constructing a sidewalk adjacent to the right-of-way or within the right of way and that is addressed in condition number five that a six-foot sidewalk be provided along the subject properties old higby mill road frontage the property has been developed as a church since i believe 1980 and it appears that first alliance purchased the property in 1989 and so they've made a number of improvements over the years and the staff just feels at this time it is is really the right time to connect the sidewalks in this vicinity to allow for people not only to come to the church, but to also connect to other sidewalks in this vicinity and get to other places that are nearby. They are doing construction in the front portion of their property, and so this is the time when they can make modifications in that area for their stormwater, are able to work around utilities. If there's concern about the utilities and their locations, certainly they can work with the state as well as the local government in terms of traffic engineering or a bike and pedestrian planner to find a way to construct that six foot sidewalk and then they did take the opportunity that we gave them for continuance to meet with the adjoining neighborhood Association as well as property owners across old Higbee Mill Road within the last few weeks and so I think we'll let them address the concerns that were expressed and how they plan to mitigate those I think we did have just as a refresher parking being installed out front here between the old Higbee Mill Road right-of-way and their their existing parking as well as a new entrance from old Higbee mill that would be adjacent to the single-family homes whoops and this is their updated site plan so again the new entrance new parking and then they've shaded out the sidewalk indicating that they don't want that to be approved by the board but the staff recommends that the sidewalk connect between this new entrance and their property line so I'm sorry Tracy show me the sidewalk again it's shown in kind of a very light gray shade along the front here which they've just kind of drawn drawn a line in but and the labels not really readable it just well there's Which part is there currently? So the very, very light gray shaded line that runs on this plan from north to south. And it runs along the property line. So the property line is depicted with sort of a dash. And then it says PL dash PL as it runs up there. Okay. Does that make sense? And so the length of the portion to connect it, do we know about how long that is? It's the frontage of their property. Okay. entire length but again they've operated there for 40 years I think staff believes now is the time when they're doing improvements to the front of this property to go ahead and make those sidewalk connections okay thank you and if the applicant would come forward please Got a little presentation with just a couple of photos on there, so I'll let them get it up. But I'm Daniel Rayner with Thoroughbred. I'm also on the board of the church representing this project, civil engineer. And I'm sorry, Donna, were you able to get his name? Daniel Rayner. okay sounds good Will this work? Okay. Several things on your parking lot. PowerPoint. PowerPoint. PowerPoint, yeah. All right. Give it another second. But generally, we are still in agreement with all the recommendations. It's that sidewalk that I want to talk about a little bit. but we did get a chance to meet with some of the neighbors. We set up a meeting with them, I think, was it last week? And we're able to discuss with them, hear from them what they had to say about stormwater and construction and screening as well, were some of the things that we talked about. So we've tried to take some of those into consideration in this plan as much as we could. And one of the things that we updated on this plan, as they mentioned was the previous plan we had, we were always planning on meeting all the zoning order with regards to landscaping and such. We were able to actually kind of represent that here so you could see the screening along the side of that road, which I'll flip back to once we get to, let's see if this works, all right. So these are the staff approval conditions, just amending the site plan, alterations, required throughout the permitting process, kind of summarized. You know, meeting all necessary and required permits to obtain that we'll need through construction. The final configuration of the parking lot, make sure it configures to the Division of Traffic Engineering. Parking lot to be paved and lined, which we're doing in favor of. There's the item 5, which they want the 6-foot sidewalk to connect to pedestrian access, encourage that. And then internal pedestrian walkway, which is one of the things we did add. We didn't show that on the previous plan. We added it from out at the road all the way up to the building, which was a good distance. And then stormwater management plan, obviously we'll have to abide by all those, and those would be for the next phase when we do construction drawings. And then, of course, any lighting that we would put would have to make sure it meets the zoning ordinance, Article 30. So we did meet with Tracy and Traffic and Dalton as well, trying to discuss the sidewalk along the frontage of the road. And that is the item that's really just rather more challenging. So some of the concerns we have is just with the kind of implementation of it. Not only is that section of the roadway smaller, it kind of siphons down a little bit. right on the other side coming from the subdivision side going out towards Harrisburg Road the section of the road is a little bit wider and that narrows there until you get across our property and it widens up a little bit for the turn lanes coming on to Harrisburg Road so a pretty busy road as we all know so some of the other things that we'll show in these pictures is just even get the sidewalk there we actually it kind of goes in direct conflict with waterline fire vault utilities we've got some multiple retaining walls head wall some challenging things to get across and so this kind of shows a picture of the walkway I think it's actually just a four-foot walkway but that's one that that honestly we we want we want to encourage people to come from the neighborhood where they might walk and be able to come and be a part of our church if they want to and so we've actually added that to our plan as far as extending that sidewalk all the way up to our property to our sidewalk that would then extend up to the road. As you turn around and face towards Harrisburg Road, you can see it, I mean, it looks just like a straight shot, but as we move across here, you start to see some challenges where we've got a drainage coming outside of the, let's see if there's a pointer, yeah, so you've You've got a drainage area coming out from there from the existing detention, which would be modified, because that's where the parking lot would be, but we still have to have some sort of outlet system along there. This is one of the major hurdles, which is right in conflict with where that would be, and that's, I believe, an 8-inch main coming to there, and then the fire vault, and then we have our domestic coming off that, which is, I think, a 3-inch. So you've got your FTC as well as your fire department connections there in the vault. You keep going along forward. We've got electrical. You've got utility poles. You can kind of start to see. I think we'll have another picture up here where we've got a retaining wall starting right there. And this also is a short little kind of turn lane as you come into our only entrance. And so this kind of shows the, it's about two, three foot retaining wall here. And you can see the beginning of the head wall right there that transfers the drainage across the road. A little bit better picture of that as you're coming in. And then you can see on the other side, we also have the same condition of head wall, retaining wall. really making it rather challenging to figure out, you know, an area we're not even planning on changing, but now significant construction and design considerations. And the other thing we wanted to show, too, was being that Harrisburg Road, there are no sidewalks along Harrisburg Road there. There's no crosswalk for anyone to get across Harrisburg Road, so there's no button or anything. and as you continue on here, so we would be creating a sidewalk to a rather unsafe condition that would actually force people to walk, either still walk in the grass or at some point have to walk on the curb, across a drainage ditch. Really a situation that I don't think we want to encourage anyone to be walking alongside this busy section. So these are just a few other pictures showing that. So one of the things that we did internally discuss as far as what we felt like was a pretty good kind of how can we come together and solve this, you know, because we do know that Lexington as a whole wants to encourage pedestrian connectivity, and as properties develop, we want that to happen. And so as such, one, for starters, we, again, proposed connecting to subdivision, which makes sense. That's where you will have pedestrian traffic maybe coming from. you won't have anyone walking along Hairsburg Road, or if you do, very few people would walk on Hairsburg Road to even turn down this way. And so I feel like a good bargain here would be to, once the adjoining property creates a sidewalk, that would then probably trigger that that intersection would have some sort of signalization or something. the church would be in total agreement to then extend the sidewalk all the way across where it would make sense now that there's some connectivity versus creating a sidewalk to a rather unsafe condition now that would lead people to or even tempt people to try and cross a road which is really rather hazardous without any kind of crosswalk put in place. So that's really our only thing that we like to request not be one of the conditions of approval or at the very least the condition that the sidewalk we would develop it once the adjoining property is developed and we could be in favor of that. I don't know if you all have any questions about any of that. Do we have any questions of the applicant at this time? If you could just quickly explain the differences between the map that we got last time and the map that you've given us today. Let me see. It might be better. You could switch back to the... No, if you switch back to Tracy's. So on the previous one, we didn't show a sidewalk across the frontage of our property. And on this plan, we show it in gray. And there's a note on it can just say to be developed once the adjoining property is developed. So it would be kind of a phase two approach to that. We also have extended the sidewalk from, I guess, page south there up through our kind of crosswalk across our entrance to tie into our sidewalk that we added to the plan. and you can see it kind of going. Let me, is that using my finger, sorry? So we extended the sidewalk from here up here and added that sidewalk all the way up to our property, which the sidewalk along here I think is probably around 500, 600 feet in length. It's a pretty good distance, as well as this one. But we've added this sidewalk up here. We've also added kind of the screening that we need to have. We just showed it, representation. We haven't labeled what type of trees or anything they would be. That would be a part of the construction drawings. But we also went ahead and showed screening along the parking lot as well. We went ahead and just showed those. So the main differences between the previous plan and this one was we showed the connection here, added the sidewalk up here, as well as showed this sidewalk to be kind of a future phase. because as those as those pictures show there's quite a bit of challenges in this area that really make it difficult to do if you could on the the bottom the new entrance is there a reason why there's not a sidewalk on the south side of the new roadway there it looks like you're proposing landscaping yeah so we have sidewalk you're talking about on where the landscaping is uh-huh why there's not a sidewalk there so there's a sidewalk on on that side that's going to yeah i'm asking why there's not if you guys thought about putting it on the south side because if you're encouraging neighbors it seems odd that you would have them cross the entrance and then cross three more conflict points when you can just put the sidewalk on the south side and i don't like micromanaging people's projects but to me that just makes more sense from a safety perspective i don't think we'd have any problems switching that over over to the other side that wouldn't be an issue okay no other questions at the moment i think we had some people in the audience who wanted to speak okay come forward and state your name please charles line thank you mr lane we have your time up three minutes Okay, our house is located, if you will scroll that to the top, please. Thank you. Our house is located right here. And if you'll go to some of the pictures or to the next slide. Yes. we proposed to the church at the meeting there was no engineer present at the meeting so we don't know if they got our recommendation or not but we proposed that they move that entrance down higby mill road it would cost them about 17 spaces to do that that would to go from 25 foot from our property line to that drive is what they currently have. We're asking that it would be about 75 feet total once they move that. To pick up those additional spaces, there's area up in these areas here where additional spaces could be added pick up what they're losing on that on those 17. Currently there are if you'll go to the next slide please. Yes that's fine. This just shows you what 25 foot off of this fence line this is Mr. Wilson's property. Our trees the tree line is on the property line of the church our house sits back 20 foot from that tree line so we would be 45 foot from a driveway that's going to be used on set on Sundays and Wednesdays and also they're going to leave it open all week long for people to drive in and out we've had people doing donuts and other kinds of things back in that parking lot so we're opposed to that next slide these two show to give you an idea what we're going to be faced with that car would be in the driveway of that from that church next slide that looks down towards Higbee Mill Road next slide that looks back up in this area back up in here is where the additional parking could be picked up that would lose from those 17 spots. We've not had any conversation with the engineers designers on that. Next slide. And this go back there to the street with the water. That's fine. This just shows some of the water that is coming out of the drain system from the retention pond that is there that is not working as far as water going over into mr. weights area and as far as sidewalk we recommend that there is a sidewalk because when they're they have built crosswalks on Harrisburg Road that would take you from Higby mill across Harrisburg Road to the South fork or the south Elkhorn church and they have a fall festival there and there's people that walk down that area and if more sidewalk was built it would be safer for the public in that area thank you mr. Lane I'll turn it over to mr. whites My name is Ray Waits. Those houses you see there are our families. All that background is our families. We've only owned it now into the sixth generation, so we haven't been coming left. And we're trying to, yep, he's got it started. That water that they have now is only not going in that house right behind that car because I redid the yard to keep it from coming through my grandma's basement when I inherited it. Go on down to that further side. The water that they're planning on dumping has no place to go because it goes back to the entity that is responsible to provide us a road safely for our traffic. That's Lexington now because y'all have taken over the county. That road was taken from my grandfather, my great-great-grandfather, over 100 years ago. The road itself is only 18 feet wide. Y'all were worried about the church with a 14-foot bridge. That road is 18 feet wide. The whole easement originally was 30 feet, 15 feet at the side. He owned both sides of the road. But what has happened now, they ignored it when we had an opportunity, when the Harrisburg Road was built, to, quote, do this right. It can't be fixed. It's retention basins and everything. Where's the water going to go? It's going over my side. Our family at the time along with the church got together and met with Pam Miller's group upstairs And we said we would do this the state was this federal government was going to build it from the fire plug in front of my house Whatever met there was going to go all the way to Harrisburg Road sidewalks curbs drainage everything Our family in turn was going to allow y'all to have the two easements the utilities that he's referring to is that all on my side of the road all that's there is the fire plug that keeps for them all 18 inch water main the 12 inch high-pressure gas main and the power lines are on our side of the road now if they if they come in there and do it I would go to my family in a partnership because I have the middle house I would go to that family of mine and ask them could we go back and renew that agreement the church would probably work with them I can't speak for them all I can speak for is my house which is the one that had been flooded till I diverted it and we have pictures here water going as high as the car when they run through it but the catcher is it can't be fixed period until y'all at least clean the ditch out and I can attest in my I'll be 80 here in another couple of months I can attest I've never seen the government entity who's responsible for that kind of stuff clean that ditch one time all that water is coming across my road all across my field it Rossman it washed my tobacco out when I found out when I went from hayfield to tobacco field I went down there my tobacco was a Ross washed out of the field by the roots because that water came off the other side because y'all allowed the city of engineers allowed them to dump the water directly into the field right across from where they want to come across with their second entrance behind those folks house all that water is going to come down and it has no place to go except across me thank you sir do we have anyone else thank you please I'm Craig Wilson I live right next to Charlie and Colette right the corner of higby mill and first alliance property and we met with them last tuesday evening and the neighbors presented a plan to have more green space behind our houses and not have that additional entrance 20 feet from our property line or less we presented it all the neighbors that were at that meeting kind of agreed with our our plan presented to the church and honestly they just disregarded it completely all we asked for was a little more green space for that new interest to be further away from our property lines that's all we asked for thank you sir any other public comment anything from the staff before we allow the applicant to respond the applicant please First off, thank you for coming, everybody. I'm glad we got to talk last week, and I'm glad that your all's voices get to be heard. I've got notes for each of you to try and answer all your questions. So I wasn't able to be at the meeting, but I was debriefed by Deb. We talked about it quite a bit as far as what you all talked about. So all those notes were taken into consideration. As far as Mr. Charles, the request to move the entrance, some of the things that we think about too with regards to the flow of traffic that we have on Sundays is one, we don't want the entrances to become too close because then that in itself will create additional traffic control issues with. And I'm sorry, can we put the site plan back up? Oh yes, that would be good, that would be good. So if we move those entrances too close, then it kind of defeats the purpose of having that second entrance. One of the things that we want to be able to do is direct traffic one way in and out on Sundays. This last Sunday actually, I was talking with Deb who's here with me. We actually had people come in and drive around during the 930 service and there were literally no parking spots. So they had to drive out. And so that's one of the real drivers of why we need some more parking. actually just recently went to four services we have an 815 a 930 11 and now 12 15 1230 and so this is what we just have a lot of people come which is exciting but we're just trying to figure out we want to make sure everyone has a place to park and so moving that entrance if we were to move this entrance over here I mean that that's why all these spots are so valuable You all may wonder why we can't put parking spots over here. One of the reasons over there is because it actually, the gray changes drops off quite a bit to almost a drop off by the end of it where the apartments are. Or else we would have looked there initially too. There's also some drainage swales that are already actually working over there. And Mr. Charles, we are also opposed to people coming in our parking lot doing donuts and we try to monitor as best we can. We can't close off the entrances, but we do have, that's one of the reasons we do have some parking lot lighting to try and at least alleviate that. People generally, if they see that there's lights on, they won't do that, so we do the best we can on that. And Mr. Waits was it? Yes. The drainage issue, that is a big concern for sure. And any new development that we have to do, and I know for a fact in the previous development too, when they put in that detention basin that they have there, that had to go through engineering and get approved so that the rate of flow isn't more than it was before. But the issue, as you mentioned, when that road got put in, and actually, if you wouldn't mind, sorry for switching, flipping over to the PowerPoint that had the pictures, there never was really established a good ditch along the road in that right of way. It kind of just drains off and there there is there is a very minor not that one the powerpoint presentation That is more so why you experience that water draining across the road Not so not not necessarily due to the fact that there's a detention base and any of we add more parking will be required we'll have to do underground detention and that will have to be controlled to the same level and more for the additional that we would be adding which is part of the next phase but I don't mind explaining that and believe me we have a hard enough time getting anything through engineering so they won't let anything through unless it meets their ordinance and which is good and so the issue that they would need let me flip across so you kind of see it just kind of slopes down there's really not much of a ditch to begin with along the road it's a city road there and whenever the city comes in actually why is it that's that's another reason why hopefully they do that because then they would address those concerns but that's more the reason why you see any drainage issue anything new that we do we will have to control we're not allowed to on a city level and a state level to actually dump more water into someone else's property we have to control that water quality as well as water quantity and then you also mentioned actually the South Elkhorn Church they have their fall festivals actually we we didn't do it in the last year but in in past years actually we have coordinated with them they have used our parking lot and shuttled from our parking lot across they did not walk across the road they shuttled the people in fact actually we on Sundays use Chick-fil-a's parking lot and shuttle across we don't walk across there because it's just not a safe condition yet to do that so that just again speaks to kind of the nature of that condition um i think that addresses all the comments i had written down i don't know if you all have any other questions for me yes miss plumley thank you i wonder is there an lfug engineer present that could comment on any of this which part in particular on the sidewall or the water oh yeah So Josh Tazarn was here last month and I don't see him in the audience today from the Division of Engineering. But I do think he met. Did he speak with Deb and Daniel about the application? I don't know if we've spoken about this one. I've spoken with him a lot about other ones. But he's not here today to address it. Mr. Clark? Yes, just let me say I'm a little disappointed that knowing the concerns of the neighbors, that extension that comes out closer to their houses, it seems like to me that that's really not that necessary. I think somebody said 17 spots. I'm disappointed that you didn't just straighten that line out and eliminate that extension over toward the houses. And it seems like to me that that would not be that terrible a solution. It's not fair to the neighbors to all of a sudden have that parking lot within that small distance to their homes. And so I would be very negative about approving this because of that. It just seems like such a simple thing that you could do as a church because you know the neighbors are concerned about that. And I'm concerned about the water, too, but I understand the difficulty is there. but the difficulty of just saying oh let's don't add those 17 spaces out there or whatever that it wasn't put to put the road there instead not a big deal it's something you can do and I'd be very disappointed if you don't do that thank you so I don't know if this is for you or for staff but or if anybody can address this so they there was a ditch mentioned and so if they put a ditch at the bottom of the church I realized that that would also require culvert pipes and some various then you'd have to drain it somewhere as well but is that a possibility before it gets across the street again the division of engineering isn't here I'd hate to have to retract something I said because I'm a planner and not an engineer. They'll have to meet the Division of Engineering's manuals that are in place for commercial, taking care of commercial water. Generally you cannot have your water run off onto someone else's. So it sounds like that's already occurring and I'm not sure, but I would think the Division of Engineering would want you to correct the problem that exists today. Well, it's a hill. I understand that, but you're going to have to take care of your stormwater somehow. And usually digging a basin is the way to do that, but the basin has to drain somewhere too. So they are going to have to figure out how to accommodate the stormwater. They're adding impervious surface to their lot, so they do need to accommodate stormwater. And that is one of the conditions. We'll have to address everything. I'm sorry. Number seven. Right. right i'm sorry sir i was i was going to say what you say we'll have to we'll have to meet condition seven okay and the other conditions listed we were comfortable with but you are asking for a modification at a minimum of the six foot sidewalk agreeing to do it once the adjacent property has been developed correct that's not really a feasible condition it's just if if the the adjoining property is already developed oh it is yes so there's no the other property won't come in and add a sidewalk they have no reason to they again they're already developed it would have to be a state project that improved the that intersection but it is still important that we have a walkable community and everyone does their part right every property whether it's the developed neighborhood the subdivisions they all have to do their part too so we're just asking that the church at this point after being there for 40 years do their part to provide for the pedestrian accommodations that everyone else is providing thank you yes i have a question have you all developed your storm water management plan based on your current development plan at this point no not yet because we we have to get this plan approved first before we can get the design construction plans if you've got topographic issues that are going away from your retention basin seems to me it would be difficult to contain your runoff so one of the things like sorry one of the one of the things that that's done during engineering process if there's any concerns on on point sources of drainage there's different devices such as level spreaders or even instead of instead of having one source of outlet which is just typical you may have two sources of outlet to spread out that flow across two different points, but that's something that during the engineering process, they'll look very closely at. They just don't take my word for it, they review it, and they check over the calculations. And so I know this basin itself was developed in the last 10 years, and so it's had a much closer look at some of the stuff from 25, 30 years ago, and anything that's developed now, it has to meet the current standards of what it is so if there are even if there that basin was previously developed in a certain way you don't get to just develop the same way we'll have to still meet today's today's standards thank you good all right i'm sorry sir did you have something really quick we were done with public comment oh i'm sorry he was talking about the the new proposed entrance and all we were asked for is 50 additional feet set back and then he talked about how close the two would be there's still the entrances would still be 100 140 yards apart so it's not 50 feet is a minimal okay ask but there's still enough room there all right thank you i'm sorry we had something no we don't normally do rebuttal so my apologies i thought you had something additional yeah okay no i'm sorry it's the the applicant's term now we've already done our three minutes do we have anything additional or is anyone prepared to make a motion Are there conditions that we have concerns about? I think for at least my part, I would probably echo Mr. Clark on this when I would like to see a little bit more bending on this, because you're asking the variance to bend in agricultural, rural or agricultural urban. Agriculture is built right into it. it's hard to go down that path even though it is allowed use of parking lot that's about the worst use of any zone ever and I think that that one compromise would have assisted in guiding the board at least from what I'm hearing in a direction of approval I think that's kind of where at least I'm seeing where we're stuck right now is we don't disagree with you but you're asking to change a direction, your neighbors are asking you to change a direction, and therein lies the crux of if there was a compromise, then it would make it a lot simpler if these folks weren't out here upset about this direction that you're asking us to go as well. I can speak that to one of the reasons we didn't, between me and dad, make a change. We didn't get a chance from last week to this week to bring it in front of the board, the whole board to see if they would be okay with us moving the entrance and we'd have to do that first before we could just have a normally on most plans I would just say hey let's shift it and submit it back but with that little bit of time from last week when we met with them on Tuesday to here we didn't have a chance to get the whole board together to say hey can we shift this entrance over take away 17 spots is that okay so if that's one of the major issues I think we if If we had more time to bring that back to them, we might be able to make that change. And I don't know. I mean, I think it's part of the ideology, too, of a constant back and forth. And I don't know if it would be feasible to maybe block off an entrance during the week and make it just Sunday, Wednesday, where it's, you know, you can only traverse during those times. I'm not sure. But I think that's where we're stuck. We're not really trying to come up with a solution. It's just that's where we're hung up on. So you're saying that in order to make that adjustment, you'd have to take it to the board. So are we looking for another postponement? Continuously. You can make that adjustment. The board can approve this with an additional buffer space, and then they will have to submit a revised site plan to address that condition. Okay. We don't have to go back to their decision-making board. They will have to follow your decision. Okay. Well, I would make a motion to approve PLNBOA 2491, First Alliance Church of the Christian and Missionary, request for a conditional use permit to expand the parking lot for an existing place of religious assembly in an agricultural urban zone on property located at 2201 Old Higby Mill Road, based on the conditions as set forth, plus the condition that the church will approve an adjustment in the proposed plan to eliminate the new parking spaces that move the parking lot closer to the residence. I'll say, Mr. Clark, may I make a friendly amendment? Please. And just say that last condition that they shall submit a revised site plan to the planning staff to approve the relocation of the entrance. Is that really what we need? I think we need to know how far you want the entrance shifted. Yeah. Okay. The proposed plan would be to move the entrance that would be an extension of the original parking area that borders the residential areas. Is that clear? I think she's talking about 15. We wanted to move it over. I can't recall if the neighbors asked for 15 or 25 additional feet. So currently at the building line for the AU zone, the pavement starts at the 25-foot line. Is that correct? This little corner right here is a setback of 25 feet on the side? Yeah. So the dash line that follows the property back on both sides is a setback of 25 feet. And I know we're still in motion, but... Well, we need to get it right. That's true. Yeah. If you're asking for this to go from 25 to 40 or 25 to 50, that's what we need to know. Well, there's no way to, I can't tell how far that would be just looking at the map here. But the original parking lot has a line that borders the lot between the residents. And I'm proposing that that line be maintained through the addition of the new parking lot. I'll say real quickly, would it be beneficial to take a couple of minute recess, let Mr. Clark and Ms. Wade converse on that last condition, just so we get it right? That'd be fine. Yeah. That'd be good. We can do that, but just for the record, so we're asking them to move it you know, inside the allowable building line. I mean, they're already, they're not asking for a variance for that building line on that side. They're already within their 25 feet, so we want it to be, we're putting a higher standard for them to move it inside. But I can't give you the feet because I don't know how many feet that would be. That's why the line of that original part is. Could we see a graphic of the site plan, please? I think I'll clarify what we're looking at. Do you have any of your documents? Do you have one of these? Okay. Yeah, I don't know where that line is. Okay. That's right. I see what you're saying. yeah i've got it okay yeah i think what they were uh discussing was where you had your sidewalk there taking that uh that line straight down to higby mill thus eliminating those uh are you talking right there yeah yes taking that sidewalk straight down and eliminating those that sidewalk and the islands there and going straight down to higby mill so that so that would shift the drive aisle about 75 feet yeah i was going to say that's a 200 feet that's a big difference and that's over 30 plus spaces right there that they would lose because you still have to put the drive Well, I would say that what we're looking for is that the new parking spaces not be any closer to the residence that the original parking lot was situated. well they're looking for the drive not to be right yeah the drive aisle that that that i think quadruples the distance like you mentioned we still need to be able to get that drive in there and you'll still have the two-way drive that's got to come through i would that's fine if you want to make that amendment but i would vote against that we're we're adjusting the parking the parking lot not this not the drive itself well it has to be i mean if you shift it up you've got to move the drive 75 feet up and then you still have to have the width of the drive right and so we now have them building requiring them to build 100 feet or 75 feet back from the building line so they're 100 feet from the residence and that's not the requirement the 25 feet is the requirement we can make an adjustment but that's huge and it sounded like what they really wanted was just a day an additional landscape buffer or a different buff so it doesn't have to be a because this line if you extend it over it's going to be a greater distance from these houses than where it started so just an overall distance of i can't remember what we said but 25 feet or 50 feet whatever it was let's decide on a on a number then you got a number okay 300. would an additional 25 feet on top of the existing 25 feet be sufficient are you asking an additional 25 feet so an additional 25 feet so the building line's 25 feet you're adding 25 feet so then you're at 50 feet that would work that would work that's double that sounds right let's let's put that in in the in the motion in the motion then can we do that we better start the motion over okay i'm sorry i won't bother to read the whole thing i'll just just just adding the adding adding Number 9 would be to remove parking spaces that are closest to the residential area, no closer than 50 feet from the property line. Is that good? Well, still we're just moving the drive, right? So I think we should specify the condition that you're moving the driveway. I think it's the vehicle use area will be 50 feet from the property line, a minimum of 50 feet from the property line. I think the term we want to use is vehicle use area. Okay. That would both include the drive and include the parking without us getting into eliminating parking versus drive or anything. I think it's vehicle use area. Right. Will be a minimum of 50 feet from the property line. That's fine. Yeah. That's good. That sounds good. Does anybody understand that? were you were you going to amend or keep item five the same what's that were you going to do any change to item five or keep it the same he hasn't they we haven't agreed to do that yeah the sidewalk yeah i think they're leaving the request for the sidewalk in well that would still be there as as far as I'm concerned. So we have a motion for approval with the conditions 1 through 8 as listed, plus number 9 as stated. Can I just make a comment about something else? I realize this is an engineering thing, but if this is approved, Just check on the neighbors down below during and after construction about the water runoff and make sure that they're not damaging the property down there. Absolutely. Okay. So we have a first and we have a second. Ms. Wade, you're comfortable. We are open for some discussion now. Well, I just want to be clear. We already are asking for a revised site plan through condition number one to address all of the other conditions. So the applicant would already be required to submit an amended site plan to us to address the changes that might be mentioned in the rest of the conditions. So what we need to do is just add the ninth condition. And what I wrote down was the new vehicular use area entrance shall be a minimum of 50 feet from the eastern property line. Is that what we discussed? Correct. But I would like to request that it be to the approval of the Division of Traffic Engineering just to ensure that that entrance is a safe location. They can go out in the field and verify that there aren't any site distance issues with that shift. Okay. That's fine with me. chad you're good okay so just are brandon you had something else i would say if we're ready to discuss yes okay so um i'm not a huge fan of number five um building the six foot sidewalk i agree that we do want more sidewalks i agree we want to get them when we can but in this instance the property's already developed. It's not a redevelopment. All they're doing is adding some parking lot. I think it's a big ask for them to essentially construct a very large system-wide issue on Higby Mill Road. I drive Higby Mill. It needs to be updated by the city from top to bottom for the most part. So with that being said, I would, and I think I can do this, I would move to remove, is that how I do it? I'm gonna strike that from his motion and have a vote on it and then we can move on. So, since there's a motion to approve on the floor, you can do a motion to amend the current motion to strike that condition which would be voted upon? Yes. If granted, the motion would be amended as you said. Correct. Then I'll move that we amend Mr. Clark's motion to strike condition number five. That's satisfactory. I'm fine with that, and I think the project's great. Yeah, the motion to amend has to be seconded and voted upon. By someone other than Harry. I would suggest that. Okay. I will second. but I also was just going to mention in the discussion that I would have approved without the addition of the I mean I wouldn't stop the project but I actually would have approved without the other 50 foot sometimes when we get here and we make these decisions let's just move it here I just understand how much that change changes in a site plan so we did make the amendments there to make sure that traffic and everyone else looks at it but you can't just move it on the plan always and think that it can work so uh... that was just coming so we have a motion we have an amended motion that was a good is mentioned in and on the floor has to be there upon commission to amend has to put on separately from the truth area so we have a motion to amend in a second so we'll take a vote on the motion to it man an approval of that but we vote yay then that is we're proving them in striking them civics today okay the motion to amend has passed so number five condition will be removed so now we're voting on the original motion to approve which included the new condition no it's already been made so we have the motion on and harry first and chap was second Yeah, it's showing appropriately. I think she already has it up here. We did. We just need a vote. Yeah. Okay. looks like the motion has been approved thank you all right we gotta go faster because brandon's leaving in 40 minutes all right plnboa some people may want that right plnboa 24-100 booker group investments if the applicant can come forward. Good afternoon. Please state your name for the record. Hello, my name is Harvey Booker. This has been recommended for approval and there are three conditions that are listed. Have you had an opportunity to review the conditions? Yes, I have. Okay, and are you comfortable with the conditions including the 501c3 portion? Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry. I think staff didn't have any additional questions on this one, but we do have some public comment. So if you'll stay close, we'll allow the public comment. This will be your opportunity if you'd like to speak. And you'll state your name for the record and you'll have three minutes. Hello, I'm Deborah Tudor and I am a resident in the area that we're talking about with Mr. Booker's group about a community center. First of all, I got to, he answered some of my questions while we were sitting there doing your break. And in this letter it stated that the purpose of the appeal was a request for permit to establish a community center within their area, 285 East 6th Street. And my concern was that we already have three community centers less than a mile or within a mile of each other, and they are the William Wells Brown Center or school, which is at 6th in Shropshire. Then we have Charles Young, which is at 3rd in Shropshire. And then we have Dunbar, which is on Upper Street. And I didn't know why we should have another community center. And then it was explained to me because my concern was mainly with the children walking and seniors that were going to be attending that basically there's no parking area except on his little lot right there on the side. You have to park on 6th or M tree lane, which is already limited. And also the buildings, there's group homes. Again, I was thinking about children attending, seniors, and many children walking within the neighborhood going to the community center. And my concern was about a drug rehab center down at the Victory House, which is still on 6th Street, a block, and children will have to pass that. Children, teenagers, even the seniors in their area. And most likely they're going to be using cars, but there's no place to park. And that's a boarding house right across from their building, apartment unit and I don't know who lives there or what kind of type of housing they provide for, I don't know if it's drug rehab people, because that's a victory house also. And there's a boarding house with just different people who sit out and there's all types of activities in the area, whether solicitation or prostitution sometimes in that area right on the corner, and Herb knows that, because he's seen it himself. Also, there's drug activities at times. There's speeding involved right at that four-way stop on Elm Tree Lane. They finally got bumpers on Elm Tree Lane. But the safety of the children crossing, and now I found out basically it's not a regular community center like we're thinking with seniors, children, teenagers. You're going to have offices or provide different types of meetings, a place for meetings of different programs involving, I'm just going to say, he told me like black soil and some other things that he has in mind. That's why I wanted to know if he was going to speak first so I could hear the whole question about his program. Because we got a letter through the mail that doesn't list anything. When you say community center, you're thinking of children, teenagers and adults. This is something kind of totally different. And that's why I wanted to hear it, because the letter they told us, this is our only chance to ask questions when they should have been stated in the letter, what kind of programs they're going to hold there at the community center. Okay. And from my understanding, it sounds like it's not going to be the standard type of center that we think of. involved in children activities, playing basketball, soccer, karate classes, things of that sort. Because that's what goes on at Charles Young Center and also at Dunbar, they have activities for seniors and children, and also at William Wells. So I wanted to really hear what he had to say, and I don't know if I missed, and I will. We're going to give him an opportunity to review. Okay, because I will rescind, quote, my opposition. Because after listening to him, just talking to me one-on-one, it was a different type of questions that I had. Okay, thank you. That's just me. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Charles Stewart. I'm a resident of Amtree Lane, where the community center is going. And so I oppose it. Just like the young lady said that spoke before me, you know, we received the letter, had no idea of what to expect and what the community center was all about. However, I agree there's a community center east of the neighborhood, which is Wim Wells Brown, five blocks or less. you have Castlewood that's five blocks north of that location and then you have Dunbar Center which is five blocks or so west of that location. So right now there's community centers within the area also there's a lot of foot traffic from one of the houses that is on Elm Tree Lane. So again, I oppose, and that's why. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Caleb Evans. I'm here on behalf of myself from Chestnut Street, as well as two other families who live in Elm Tree and Ohio Street, respectively. I'm interested in what services are supposed to be provided at the community center. I could be in favor of it, but initially I'm a little concerned just by doing basic research about the track record. I'm concerned that providers of specific services haven't sought out this change. services in the area such as a sober living facility have operated historically without issue or need to change the ordinance. Secondly, we've done a little research and we've noted that there's 18,000 in delinquent property taxes across properties in Fayette County from this investment group as well as 6,000 in Boyle. and there are also outstanding fines for failure to maintain 616 elm tree as a rental property from booker investments essentially i just want to make sure that we're fostering good neighbors in our community thank you thank you yes sir good afternoon my name is terry dumford i'm the founder of a non-profit called the voyage movement i'm also the president of the naacp in bourbon county I'm also the president of the NAACP in Bourbon County, and I do a lot of work in Fayette County. I'm on the crisis prevention team with the mayor's office. I just left a mentor group. We mentor in six schools across the district, and I have a community center of my own that we opened in Bourbon County. We call it a multipurpose center because it serves a lot of different purposes, right? There are some programs. We have community closets. We have food banks. and it's a multi-purpose center because the entire community has access to it. We've had birthday parties in there. We've had meetings for women who do things that were going to college, right? I support the community center because, I mean, why wouldn't you? I'm listening to people come up here and talk about we have too many community centers in close proximity. But you can drive around this neighborhood and there's too many liquor stores in close proximity. Like, what are we really arguing about right here when we're talking about something that is a positive to the community? This is something that's adding to the community. We watch the news all day long, and we see youth that have nowhere to go. So where are they at? They're in the streets. We have an individual who is putting their resources up to provide a safe space for youth, and we have individuals questioning the programming, questioning the validity, questioning the merit of it. It's a community center, right? It's a positive energy source in the community, in a space that needs it the most. It wouldn't matter if it was a community center on every block in this neighborhood because it's needed. I'm not sure, and I'm not going to go too far, but this is just what I do every day, right? We are here every day with these youth, young adults. We have reentry programs. So we are individuals who are in a position to uplift and empower our community, and we're going to support that every time we see it. And I encourage you guys, and I know you have approved it, to encourage it every time you see it. Because you got individuals from the community saying we're going to impact our community. This man's not asking for anybody else's money. He's putting his own money in. And this is, he's not asking for any city fund. He's saying I'm going to put a community center in an area that needs it. We can all ride over it right now. And it's five to ten liquor stores in close proximity. Nobody's talking about that. Are we talking about close proximity of community centers? That's the argument today? Come on, man. Let's do better. Good afternoon. My name is Doyle Lee. I run a nonprofit here called Hearts, helping everyone achieve resilience through support. I, too, work with the mayor's department and one Lexington program, and we service about seven schools. I'm an administrative director with Terry Dunford. I grew up in East End. It's where the location is. My grandfather used to pastor church on Chestnut Street. We're active with William Wells Brown right now. And I just wonder how many people engage the youth that we're servicing right now. We talk about Dunbar and Castlewood and Charles Young Center. These are the communities in their proximity. But let me tell you guys something. The programming that's going on in those facilities, they're doing yoga. Okay? They are servicing some of the elderly. but what he plans on doing and repurposing and developing and training and putting programs inside these places so that our kids that are in our communities that we run across every day. I've seen one this morning on the way to LTMS that we serviced last year through MLK, and he said, where are you guys at at our school? It's boring. It's nothing to do after school. And so what we're trying to do is a hands-on approach with the kids that are on these blocks in these neighborhoods to bring them some agriculture, job skill training, and then develop the relationship with the parents so that we can start some parenting classes up here so that our kids right up the street here have the same shot that other kids had. Listen, I don't live in this neighborhood anymore, but there's resources available for my children, but this is a marginalized neighborhood where the poverty level in this neighborhood is below the national average, And I'm just telling you right now, these parents don't have the resources when they have more than one kid in the house to be able to have programming accessible to them. And so what we're going to be doing is, yes, I'm going to be volunteering my time and our nonprofit to not only build up these youth in our neighborhood, but engage the parents so they can be a part of a better community. And I guess that's all I have to say. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Hi. My name is Ian Colton. I live on Elm Tree Lane and a community center does sound good and it it sounds like a good thing for the community if it's actually serving children but what is there now is not that there's adults hanging out selling drugs increased activity and if you guys hold him accountable to serving children and helping kids in the community I think that would be great but I don't know if there's a plan to make sure that it gets used for the purposes they're saying it's to be used for because if you drive by there right now any time of the day it's not children hanging out there and i just want to make sure that this is a positive force for the community and not a detriment to the community like it is right now so thank you thank you how y'all doing my name is robert hodge and i am approving the community center under and i know mr booker well so he knows i come with good heart i have a lot of investment in lexington as well i do a lot but if we're going to make this a community center i want to make sure that we have the conditions that is have youth activities family recreation opportunities and open to and available to the public, not a sober living center. So I just want that to go on record that those conditions have to be met. Thank you. Thank you. I'm Percy Thomas. Most of us are here today because we got noticed to be here, okay? Those in the community got no notice of this community center. didn't have a clue until we got this so all I can go by is what I see the activities going on down there parties hanging out all the hours of the night so I'm assuming that's gonna take place again if you all approve this so I always thought that you bring it to the community have a community meeting if it's so great for the community why have we had a meeting about it why have you brought this to the community. That's all we're asking you, because I know nothing about this. Folks are sitting around right now, you know, most of the folks that want this don't live in my community. I live a half a block, half a block from this building, 533 Elm Street Lane, and that street has become a beautiful place. So what's going to happen in that building? who's going to control it and all I can go by and assume about what I see right now there's there's a he owns a house on the corner they go from that building back and forth all out of the night I seen drug activities you know I'm a retired Redderman I'm home most of the time so I see people meet halfway and do all kind of stuff like that it's just it's just we need more details before we uh approve something like this i'd like to know what's going to go on there need more details and and there's something in writing and making a law so thank you thank you thank you mr booker all right please we'll give you an opportunity to tell us more about the project and what's going in the building okay all right i'm harvey booker i'm representing 285 community center What we're proposing is a new community center. This is for a place where all our members of our community come together, connect and grow. We believe in creating an inclusive space where everyone is welcome regardless of background and status. At 285 East Community Center, we offer a variety of educational programs, community members strive for better. Like we're just doing good for the community. I've been in that building for, we had a daycare center there for, I've only been for 20 years. We helped the community throughout the whole time we've been there. From day one, we helped the youth and passed out free lunches, done stuff for the community up until the present time. One of the concerns was about the sober living facility, which I do own, They're switched right across the street, and we host the gas there. So in the afternoon, sometimes I let them have NAA meetings there. But we have an office that's on 1412 Broadway where they conduct all of their classes, everything that they do. So this bill will not be used with them unless it's just a scheduled NAA kind of meeting that will be set on a schedule. This bill is open for the community, for the youth, for everybody. This is pretty much like a resource center for everybody because the buildings that they named Windwells, Dunbar, you're not able to get usage to these buildings. So it's not helping the community. You know, they help some, but when they have, we have a brick and mortar that all these facilities that we're teaming up with, all the nonprofits, everybody, they have nowhere to go to. So we extended our building for them to use. He spoke about them hanging out. That's just that neighborhood. That's where we helping. Like right here, we joined together with the police force. We have donations, food drives, everything with the community. So this is what, you know, we're trying to bridge that gap between the community, the police department. We happen to, you know, food donations, clothing donations. We're already doing these things for the community. So I think no matter how you look at it, you can never have enough resources in one community, especially communities like ours. You're looking at, we're the worst of everything. So we need help. We need help. They're crying for help. So the only thing we're doing is providing opportunity resources for youth, parents, anybody. I do have a quick, we have to make a clarification. So on the status of the 501c3, because we can only issue approval, conditional approval, to use the property as a community center if you are established as a 501c3. are you going to is there a tenant i mean you mentioned several 501 c3 is that andrew yeah we we create one is going to be called 285 community center and on the on the note it said we have one year to do get it yeah but i think we've had some legal concerns that we can't do that my suggestion based on how the zoning ordinance is written is that if you want you can condition it that operations would not begin until they acquire the 501c3 status that'd be my suggestion whenever that occurs that might be within a year that might be a little earlier than that it sounds like operations are already established so operations are already going on right now because I was not clear on that well there's something going on because I drove by once a week probably and there's a lot of gentlemen hanging out in the front yeah like I said I've been on this building for 20 years we do different activities but when we start getting complaints from the neighbors and they told us we need to come down here and they said it looked like we was operating a business. Everything is free. It's donating. We're donating everything to the neighborhood. Is anyone living in the residence? No. And you don't plan on? The rumor I had heard was it was going to be a rehabilitation house. No. So I think where everybody's getting confused at, I do own a rehab center. So we house gas across the street. I have all the requirements and everything for that it's on record we do not host class or anything at that facility we have our own office on broadway 1412 broadway that we host classes and therapy and everything that they need to do did any of the neighbors ask to meet with you or did you meet offer to meet with any of the immediate neighbors and the reason i'm asking is because it's a community center but it doesn't sound like you've met with the community yet right yeah i'm i'm hoping to meet with indian neighbors everyone has my number i've been around for a while too yeah this isn't your first rodeo in front of us right so i was going to ask if you had any kind of security in mind for the safety of the youth that come to the building um actually i have staff phone at my facility 24 hours a day and we have cameras all around but you know once there's events planned and scheduled we could definitely arrange that and then you talked about having um events in your outdoor space and i see that you're doing some things there and so i was curious i guess about noise and things like that for the outdoor space that you mentioned here yeah anything that we do it would be doing normal business that was like i think we said we was closing at seven eight so it wouldn't be like parties or anything like it it's just like clothing drives food drives and different things of that nature one of one of staff's comments is the conditional use permit would permit a community center to to hold events in support of their adopted mission. So these events you've talked about, it says a couple of paragraphs up, educational programs and workshops include financial literacy, computer skills, job training, nutrition, and parenting skills. Applicant all proposed in the center would serve as a gathering place for recovery group meetings and fundraisers in the community. So I'm assuming that those are your adopted missions. Is that correct? Yes. I actually, I didn't print off enough, but I actually had copies of organizations and. Can I stop up? Oh, yeah. Yes. Organizations and stuff that's back in the house and it's willing to come up with nonprofits and events with us. Question to staff. Were those the information that you were given? to define the adopted mission. Was Case Place the original name? I'm sorry. What is this? Referencing Case Place. Staff, we haven't seen this. We had the, this is my part. Oh, staff has not seen it, so we'll add it to the record. Staff has not seen what just got handed out to you. Okay, so we'll send it back to you and add it to the record. Well, I read mine off the project description, so I'm assuming staff got those from somebody. Yes, these were just letters in support, but staff has not seen the letters of support. Okay. We'll need to get those added. I have a question about how your clients are billed. Is there a fee? Excuse me. Is there a fee for participants? No, we would just be charging, I mean, just saying a donation. Everything's free, there's going to be a non-profit. Everything will be free. we have other questions yeah i've got one just for okay no that's fine um would you be willing to continue this for one month you can have a neighborhood meeting with with there's a lot of opposition here um you know looks to me like it's a good idea um i was gonna recommend the exact same thing but i think i did that to you last time as maybe i'm gonna make it so yeah i put it on mr gross yeah yeah i think there needs to be some some clarification as well and and it took the words right out of my mouth the community center that didn't engage to begin with you know that's a that's a hard thing and i think they your neighbors would be a lot more in support if you at least had a conversation with them and frankly i don't see that much opposition itself i think it's just a lack of knowing what what's expected and it might be good if you had a group together and say okay let's talk about it this is what my plans are and this is how we'll do it and i think the opposition might just completely disappear would you like us to make a motion for a continuance or it's a friendly yeah i would give it a shot yeah it does it sounds like a great idea and we hey i don't know where everybody's leaning or if they have enough information that they'll vote to approve just yet so maybe that'll give you guys the opportunity to feel better about approving so i'd be for it i think it's a good direction you just want me to get the conditions that they agree into to no i i think you all need to have a conversation and it can be i think they should have to that they should be able to contribute you don't have to agree with them even there might be some things that they bring up to say that we're not going to do that but at least give them the opportunity to uh... voice their direction and then become supporters i mean that's that's what you really want right right now i'm not saying you have to agree to any conditions that they may place on you i i just think it may be a a good idea to speak with them and then come back here with a little bit more specificity of what exactly you're going to be doing to give us, to give some members of the board a little bit more comfort of, not a business plan, but something a little bit more detailed. Yeah, I'm specific on what we're going to have going at the facility. Like I said, I've owned a building for 20 years. We've been doing this. So, like, the only issue that we had right now was just, you know, from the neighbors, like you said, from the neighbors. But we've been doing classes and helping the community. So we know how we're going to run the program and all the details with it. Yeah, I just think they want more definition of what's going to go on in the space and the fit traffic that's going to be in and out of there at the different times during the day and some things like that maybe. And jumping in on that, nobody cares about what happens inside the space. They want to know what's going on outside. Are you talking about amplified music? Yeah, and then all music depends on what time you book an event or someone's having something. So that's hard to determine, but it'll be between regular business hours. So we can have a motion with what we have. We can have a motion to continue what it goes. I'm ready. I will vote in favor of it today if the board so chooses. So if there's a majority, somebody make a motion. But if not, you know, I just want to get you guys what you need to get comfortable. Yeah. All right. I think the preference would be to not continue is what I hear from the applicant. Yeah, I would rather, yeah. Unless there's just something, you know, that they ask in specific that I do and just write it in. I mean, so even with an approval, the recommendation stays the same. Right. You need to, you know, engage with the community and have them on your side. Yes. It's not going to go well. Okay. All right, well, I'll make a motion to approve. If it ends up not being used for kids, then- Time out. Yep. If it ends up not being used for kids, what can we do? Well, okay, a community center is not limited to only children. The community center is for the community, it's for GED classes, it's for literacy, it's for all sorts of different things. But what we are being told is it is not a rehabilitation home. Correct. So it's not a sober living facility. Correct. Nobody's going to be living there. Correct. Residing there, so it's essentially it's going to be an office that's going to have people coming in and participating with that. So with that being, explain, I feel comfortable with that. think some of the other issues are um you know i'm not as i i'm not worried about the safety and welfare necessarily you know specifically this spot um over any other spot in town you know like i said i drive by this corner once a week um and so i'm in the east end quite a bit and so um there are worse corners than this particular corner that I've been to. So with that being said, I will move for approval of PLNBOA 24-100 Booker Group's Investment LLC's request for a conditional use permit to establish a community center within the defined infill and redevelopment area in a planned neighborhood residential zone on property at 285 East 6th Street based upon the application, the staff's recommendation of approval, the testimony here, the affirmations that the applicant made, and subject to the conditions set forth in the report. Okay. We have the first. Do we have a second? Were you making an amendment? Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I heard. Okay. Okay. So we have a first and a second. Any further discussion? If not, we'll take a vote. I would suggest, Mr. Booker, you should have that meeting anyways. I'm definitely going to have the meeting. Have a meeting, invite the people over, let them hear what you're doing. All right. Because sometimes not knowing is the scary part. Right. So good luck with your project. All right, thank you. Thank you. Okay, the next item is PLNBOA 24-11. That's L, you're gone, okay. After you took an hour on the last one. Thank you, Brandon. I'll see you later. Brandon's got to go. Yeah, I'm sorry, which case did you call next though? Was this Ellen Harshman? No. No, I think we're starting with all the short-term rentals now. Oh, yes. So we'll go back and start with page three. But Mr. Mills can give us a property group. property group so that's p l n b a twenty four dash ninety four but what we will do uh... and and i'm back alone or the parker he's not going to i think that the back so what we will do first are our next few cases are all related to our short-term rent rental ordinance so we'll allow staff first to give us the overview regarding the ordinance and then and though the decision-making process of it and then will we'll run through them fairly quickly. Thank you. James Mills, planning staff. I'm going to give a quick review of the SCR regulations, mainly for those unfamiliar with the process. We have been here for a bit, so I'll be very quick. It is dry, so I'll try to move quickly as possible. So current STR regulations were adopted in July of 2023. We have been under this process for about over a year now. And as we can see, right now there was a grandfathering process at the end of last year. and we have been working through the conditional use process through the majority of this year. Right now, the only time conditional use permits have been required for the grandfather-in process were for occupancies greater than 12, which will involve somewhat of a case that I'm going to talk about today. But outside of that, as of September 6, there have been approximately 826 zoning compliance permits issued for short-term rentals in the city of Lexington. Article 111 kind of defines what short-term rentals are, which is the commercial use of a dwelling unit. what we're mainly concerned about defines unhosted short-term rentals which is where a primary resident does not occupy the property during the rental period again i'm trying to be very concise the zoning this graphic here shows the number of strs permitted by zone and whether it is conditional accessory or principal So whenever we're looking at conditional uses, these are uses that are specifically in each zone category that may only be suitable if certain conditions are met. Factor requirements such as noise, traffic, parking, the compatibility with an area, and whether the request complies with the other requirements of the zoning ordinance. And usually our findings for approval have to be around not adversely affecting the subject property or the surrounding properties and necessary public facilities. Additionally, we are given four other criteria for analyzing conditional uses and short-term rentals as conditional uses. That has usually been concentration in an area, the compliance record, the occupancy rate of STRs in the general vicinity, and the nuisance citations in the area. So as you can see, it's not clear, but there are 826 short-term rentals in Fayette County. and what we mainly have continued on with is how staff has analyzed these, which is a concentration of 5% in most contexts. Staff engages with revenue, zoning, enforcement, building inspection, and the police department to determine compliance and nuisance violations. and we still have been unable to determine occupancy rate and it doesn't seem like we'll be able to figure that particularly out. No applications are within our top 10 block groups so I'll move quickly past this one as well. And so this comes to all the STRs that you will be seeing today and the concentrations in the proximity to the subject property. As you can see over here, we have the percent of residential and multifamily parcels and what that percentage of concentration of STRs are per location. Again, 5% has usually been the number that we have used as high concentration or low concentration. But in certain contexts, we've also said if it's near key destination areas, such as Central Bank Center or Rupp Arena, then a 20% was more our cutoff line. But then past that, a zone change might have been more feasible in order to meet that demand of short-term stays. And I have any questions. I apologize. Zone change to what? Just depends on the given property or location, but we believe once it got past that 20% mark that there's so much demand for short-term stays in a given area that there might be better uses available than just taking a single-family dwelling and turning it into a... I see what you're saying. Okay, thanks. Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you. So with that ground being laid, the first one is PLNBOA 24-94. That's Armenteros Property Group. It is a short-term rental. It has been recommended for approval. Please state your name first. My name is Ethan Johnson. I'm here on behalf of Armenteros Group. My client was previously here on June 10th session for this same CUP. we had a split vote then and unfortunately we've lost our seventh member this afternoon so the goal is to avoid that same situation again. I'm sorry just a moment though. It has been recommended for approval. Do we have anyone here to speak in opposition? I didn't think that we did. I do have a few folks who would like to speak in approval and perhaps after my client speaks if that's permitted. No, no, absolutely. I just didn't know if approval was in play already, but go ahead. Yeah, and as you have pointed out, it was recommended approval last time and again approved this time. A lot of the discussion previously actually centered around my client's other activities in other counties operating Airbnbs. He took the previous discussion about permitting this area to be used for residential purposes under advisement, really thought about it and has changed the plan and the way he wants to use this. Nonetheless, he's still requesting a short-term rental CUP today, but he would love to give the board a little more background about what is actually the goal here and how we would like to have this fall in line with the board's use here in this situation. Okay, thank you. Hello, so my name is Carlos Armenteros. I'm the owner of Armenteros Property Group. I was actually here three months ago, kind of through the same process, and I think I didn't do a good job at sharing. We tried to tell you guys why we think we'll be really good owners and managers of the property, but I didn't tell the board why we want to keep the property. Okay, so I'm an immigrant. I was born in the Dominican Republic, actually moved here about 20 years ago. So since then, I've been living away from my mom and dad. So the whole process was to try to bring my mom and dad here to the states, and we went through the green crop process. And that house came available in the middle of the whole process, okay? So that house has actually been the family for decades. And it was owned by my uncle-in-law, Dave, who is the brother of Mark. Two of us here present would like to talk about it too. So the whole, the town you know is perfect. It's actually a ranch home where it would be perfect for my mom and dad to live there. That was the whole plan at the beginning, okay? So in the middle of the whole thing, they came here, stayed with me in my basement. We had an apartment. We were renovating the property to get it ready for them. In the middle of the whole thing, they didn't get acquainted to the United States. You know, they're old. They're 75 years old. They're weather, and they weren't comfortable with that. But they're planning to come in here probably four times a year or so. So we would like to keep the property to have home for them when they come here, as well as maybe in the long-term future, my daughter Elena and Sophia, who is six and four, eventually could use the property to maybe live there as well. We also have other elderly members in the family that could use the house for it. So the whole idea of using the short-term permit, it would be to actually pay for the cost of the house while they're not here or we're using it as a family. I didn't go in the market. I didn't buy the property. You know, it's a property opportunity that came along. I'm not looking to have any other short-term rentals in Lexington. We're just trying to have it to keep it in the family for a long-term basis. And that's why I wasn't able or I didn't share last time. I literally focus more onto the fact that we'll be great managers of this property because we do that for living in other counties. So I just want to make sure that the board knows the reason why we want to keep the property. So right now I would like to introduce Mark Tubesing, who's my father-in-law, and he can explain a little bit more about the background of the property. That's okay with you. Oh, yeah, that's fine. Thanks. Hi. My name is Mark Tubasing, and my brother, Dave, he lived at this property for 35 years. And about a year and a half ago, he passed away unexpectedly and suddenly. At that time, I became the executor of the estate, and Carlos asked if he could purchase this property. And my sisters and I agreed. We gave him a very good deal on it. We didn't try to make any money on it. But Carlos, in the meantime, he was trying to get his parents from the DR to come here. And those plans kind of fell through. In the meantime, Carlos has made a multitude of property changes. He's put a new roof on it. He's done flooring. He's done HVAC. He's put all new electric in it. He's put in a room addition with a suite for his parents with a new bathroom. The property is really magnificent. And I truly believe that he will keep that property in the same way that he has kept other properties. We've looked at all his properties like in the surrounding counties. and I really think that my brother would really love to have Carlos keep that in the family. It's also a place that maybe my wife and I may want to go to sometime. So I ask you to let us keep that property in the family. Thank you. Thank you. Here we have, is there anyone else? Okay. Thank you. Do we have any questions of the applicant? So it does look like it's been recommended for approval, no more than six individuals. There were three conditions that have been listed there. Four, I'm sorry, four conditions that have been listed and are we okay with all of those conditions? Okay. Ms. Tucker, you had a question? I just wanted to make a comment that there There was like six letters in one neighborhood association that wrote in with a disapproval. I know there's nobody here in person, but sometimes that happens. Okay. All right. And just for reference, I'm sorry, this is for staff. What was the percentage for this property? What was the? 0.6 we said okay okay right at one percent okay all right no further questions i'll entertain a motion uh madam chair moved to approve plnboa 24-94 uh armenteros property group llc to get that close okay request a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a single family residential zone on property located at 639 cecil way based on staff recommendations and subject to the four conditions thank you do we have a second okay mr clark all right no further discussion oh bob accused Is that purposeful, Bob? The recusal? Okay. A vote to recuse goes with the majority. You're actually recusing, but it looks like you're abstaining. Okay, I'm with you. So we still passed. So if it's an abstention, which is what it appears to be, not a recusal, that would go with the majority. But you mean you're abstaining from the vote? Probably did. Okay. Okay. All right. So the motion has passed. Thank you. Good luck with the project. Thank you. It is true that it was. Okay, so do we have PLN BOA 24-106, Kathy Waller? Hey, there she is. And you still have all this energy at this time of day? I'm trying. Okay, this has been recommended for approval. Let's see here. There were four conditions that have been listed. did you have any concerns about those conditions i do not okay and was there anyone here to speak in opposition for this particular item and i think i keep forgetting the percentages the does anybody remember those are we staff are we point five so less than one percent zero point five Okay. And this has been approved for up to eight individuals? Yes ma'am. We have a couple of citizen comments. I don't look really. Okay. One in support and I think the three in general against short-term rentals, it looks like. If I may, just the one that's in support is the neighbor that's right next door and they're lovely and they actually help me keep an eye on things. and I've not had any issues and I'm very particular on who I went to. If they don't explain about what they're coming in for or that, I just, I decline them. I am. So no questions of the applicant. I'll entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I recommend approval of PLNBOA 24-106 by Kathy Waller and K2 Ventures LLC request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a single-family residential zone on property located at 3326 Grasmere Drive based on the staff's recommendation and the four conditions as listed. Thank you. Do I have a second? Mr. Walker, thank you. We'll vote. Motion approved. Thank you. Thanks. The next item is PLN VOA 24-108, Brennan and Suzanne Farron. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. I'm Brennan Farron. Thanks for hanging with us. Yeah, absolutely. Thanks for hanging with us. So it has been recommended for approval. there are four conditions that have been listed. Have you had opportunity to review those? Yes, I have. Okay, understand the process and the steps that go through. And this has been limited to no more than six individuals? That's correct. Let me look and see if we have any comment here. So there is no opposition and no pop letters of comment on this one in particular. do we have any questions this particular client oh we do have a okay if we can have just a moment didn't have anyone signed up for opposition to this Good afternoon and it has been a long time. I realize I tried to be very organized with a PowerPoint. I'm Amy Clark and I live at 628 Castle Road. You know that when you're looking at a conditional use, it's a use that is suitable in some locations in the zone, and sometimes only if certain conditions are attached, and in some places it isn't suitable. And one of the things you ask about is whether there will be adverse effect on the neighborhood. Will it help the neighborhood, or does it stand to compromise it or degrade it? Right off, there's an existing compliance problem. The operator had two notices of violation before suspending the listing of the use. Let's go over here. So this is an area, it is nearly 5% of the concentration. And these are tiny, tiny lots. Can you see the blue outline there? Can I do the, the top is the magnifier, right? Yes. Okay, so it's the blue outline there. You can see these are a 20th of an acre each, and the house is a thousand square feet. And behind it, you can see the old railroad line running, the Beltline Railroad. And the property next door sold or transferred, I should say, in the same year. That's why they're both sort of orange. And this property, the subject property, had formerly been owned by an opportunity zone, Kentucky Opportunity Zone. So it's clearly an investment vehicle. Its sale price tripled in two years. It went from $77,500 in 2021 to $245,000 two years later. The other house, the neighboring house, sale price was $45,000 last time. And it was one that you can tell from PVA had been in the family for a good 25 years anyway, passed around. What I want to talk about is these priority maps to rate what the situation of the surrounding community is and whether it might have an adverse impact because of the circumstances of the surrounding community. And first, using the Neighborhoods in Transition Task Force maps that are recommended by the Mayor's Equality and Justice Commission, Racial Justice Commission. You can see that it ranks high in a, okay, you're looking at really the biggest losers, as it were. It has a low owner occupancy rate. It did have that one, it was in the top ten with low owner occupancy. Okay, Ms. Clark, we're going to wrap it up. It's very hard to present much. Well, we just have to be fair to everyone. They've been here a long time. So thank you. We do appreciate your input. So have I given a copy into the record? If you have the opportunity to peruse it or ask me questions about my handout, you will see that both by the neighborhoods in transition, it's a community that is assailed in several factors associated with economic and social and racial justice. And also by federal standards. Thank you. Thank you. Was there anyone else that needed to speak? Okay. is there any other information you'd like to give us about the project no thank you do we have questions of the applicant no i just have some comments if if there are no other questions um this house i believe this property transferred for 245 000 like a year or so ago and And that certainly puts it in reach someone who was in the workforce. This could provide housing. And for that reason, I would be opposed to this because we encourage people to come downtown to live. And this is discouraging permanent residents. And also, I believe there's nine other STRs in a thousand foot radius. So that's getting a little bit crowded down there too. So for those reasons, I would oppose these. Thank you. Cool. Any other comments? I just want to comment. I appreciate your opinion there. I think the long-term goal for the property is similar to Mr. Artemis that was here. would be to give it to my children who are four and six. So we do plan on occupying it at some point. They're just, it's not in a position currently with their age, but it's a long-term investment for us. So, yeah. It still could be a rental property for a workforce person. And you could still retain ownership. Okay, thank you. All right. Do we have other questions or comments? If not, I will entertain a motion. Pardon me. I would like to register a formal objection that the objection has not had equal opportunity to speak as the applicant. Okay. That will be noted. Thank you. and we have time out have time out you need a break you say I want to speak with yeah okay okay we'll take a five-minute recess Thank you. I'm going to put a little bit of a bag of water. I'm going to put a little bit of water on the top. I'm going to put a little bit of water on the top. I'm going to put a little bit of water on the top. Thank you. I think are we ready? Yeah. Okay. Okay, we'll call back to order. Thank you. And we have a motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair, or Madam Chair. With respect to BLM BOA 24108, Brennan and Suzanne Ferent's request for conditional use permit to operate a short-term rental on property located at 553 Jefferson Street. I moved for disapproval of the request based on the following finding of fact. One, the evidence shows that the actual concentration of short-term rentals within 1,000 feet is close to 4.4 percent, which reflects a high number in the area and could result in an adverse influence on the surrounding neighborhood and number two the property owner received two notices of violation for this property prior to submitting this application for a conditional use permit the zoning ordinance specifically states that the board shall take into account the applicants demonstrated compliance record and this record shows the applicant failed to act in a timely manner by submitting an application for a conditional use permit. So moved. Thank you. Thank you. And we have a second by Ms. Tucker. Can you please provide the dates of the violation notice? I'm sorry, say that again? The dates of the violation notice. Okay. I don't have those. Did you not get two letters from the Division of Revenue? not to my knowledge no we can ask so do we have record violations or there were notices from the division of revenue we did they did have notices from so yeah our division of revenue representatives in the back we'll see if he can identify the dates mr fron how did you become aware that you needed to apply then We were actually notified by a friend who saw it on the news that you had to get a permit for an Airbnb. So. Yep. I thought they were, are they checking? Okay. I was waiting. How long have you been operating? Sorry. We bought the property in July of last year. Once we found out about and understood the violation and the fine of $500, we unlisted the unit. So the fine information that usually comes in the notice, is that? This was given to us through the same source on the news, the news reference, $500 a day. I guess we are in discussion. We have a first and a second. So the staff saw that we had the violations, the revenue letters, but did we not take that into account, or we're just allowing them the opportunity to remedy it? Yeah, the letters that are sent out notify the property owners that they are in violation. Basically, the Division of Revenue has software that identifies operating Airbnbs or VRBOs and sends them a letter. if the address doesn't match up with our existing licensed addresses, and they're given an opportunity to then come into compliance. So they're told, depending on the zone or what the situation is, how to come into compliance, which the primary way to do that is to come to the Board of Adjustment for a conditional use permit. Which is different from when we cite the complaints. When they've had prior complaints, we've actually recommended disapproval before. I think we've only had a few that had complaints that prompted a disapproval. We did have one last month that they did not follow up in a timely manner, and they reached the point of getting a violation for operating, and we recommended disapproval for that reason. But in this case, it doesn't sound like I guess he's looking for the notice. Yeah, this is our attempt to, sorry, go ahead. On August 13th, the Division of Revenue informed us that two notices were sent and the listing was pulled after the second notice before citation for 553 Jefferson Street. So that's August 13th, right? Is that August 13th? That's whenever the Division of Revenue informed us was on August 13th. youth no i was just getting more clarification for me on the the difference in the citation and the violation and the actual complaints so almost all of the city processes start with a notice of violation first and you're given a time window in which to become compliant and once the time frame ends you're sent usually a second notice and that gives us kind of a final date and at the second notice the next step is an actual citation with the fine that can be put on the property and then collected through liens i guess and and payment and our application was submitted before august 13th is that correct it was but that's whenever we asked the division of revenue if there have been any violation notice of violation sent our communication was with the vision of revenue in august after you filed to find out i understand got it all right so we have a first and a second any further discussion yeah and i guess i'm just confused still on this too just because last month we had one that was recommended for disapproval because they didn't notify in a timely matter and the board approved it now we're flipping it where this has been recommended for approval and now because of the violation we're going to disapprove or at least heading that path i don't know if that doesn't yeah i was leaning towards approval still i'm still leaning towards approval this was their notice and this was their opportunity to cure that is the the way that the process is allowed to go I didn't know about that, but I was going to lean toward disapproval because of the nine short-term rentals operating within the thousand feet of the subject property, which was part of the motion. So I think I want to be sure we're aware that Kathy Waller, which we just approved, had the same two notice violations sent to her, and she made her application similar to Mr. Farron. So I don't think we want to treat our applicants any differently. Yes, I agree. So with that being said, is it appropriate then to have a, I mean it hasn't passed, but to have that as a condition when that's not the standard we've used with the others? Would we like to amend the disapproval to just have the concentration portion of it? We could edit it out, but I would like to state first that each case is, it's a case by itself. it's not any what happened last time sort of thing I believe so I would be willing to amend the motion to edit out number two I know somebody would have to make that emotion but yes someone can make a motion motion to amend to strike the finding in number two I'll make a motion to amend to strike the finding for number two. Then it would be handled just like it was last time. Someone seconds it. We have a, we had someone make a motion to amend to strike number two. So now we have a second. Someone has to second if they're interested in that. Yeah. I'll second. Okay. this is where i get all confused so voting for the amendment because my intention is to just make sure i'm not messing this up my intention would be to vote for approval so yes but you're just voting a motion to amend right now okay but i don't care what it says then you can abstain the amendment is fine one way or the other but no i'm sorry right the motion to amend has passed so now the motion now to disapprove has the one finding that that is to disapprove based on concentration yes ma'am okay so that's on the floor and just while we're still open for discussion the reason i would disapprove is because it is within the the criteria that we've already said to be less than five percent in areas but we've also identified those higher traffic those higher interest areas right there near downtown and near places where this type of thing actually lends it's very popular and lends itself to be a part of those the festivities and events and things that go on in that corridor, which has really grown as a destination place. So for that reason, I would be not voting to disapprove. But we are open for vote. I think we need to be sure that we understand that the percentage is 4.4 and make that clear. Thank you. Can we vote, Donna? So this is a split vote again, which means the motion to disapprove has not passed, but that also means that no motion to approve would likely pass either. So the same would be true if somebody made a motion to approve and there was a split vote. Unless somebody switches positions. If someone was interested in a motion to approve, they could make that. I feel like we should at least have the record reflected because staff did recommend approval and it met all the guidelines in which we have outlined. I'll do it just to roll the dice and get it on record, but like you said, it falls within the parameters. I don't, like everybody else, I don't necessarily like short-term rentals in the concentration, but these are the rules that have been set and placed before us, and we've got to abide by them. So, Madam Chair, I'll move to approve PLN BOA 24-108. Brennan and Susan Farron, request for conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental within the defined infill redevelopment area in a planned neighborhood residential zone on property located at 553 Jefferson Street, based on staff's recommendations and subject to the four conditions. Thank you. Do we have a second? I heard a click. Mr. Clark, a second. And I will piggyback on what Mr. Walker said, but no one likes a short-term rental until they stay in one, until they need one when they go on vacation. This is a great destination area that, I'll say it again, that people go to and right in the corridors that we encourage. Anyway, okay, it's late. The vote is open. We are open for vote. Thank you. Oh, no, we're not done. Sorry, sorry, sorry. I mean, we might be. The motion still failed. We gave our attempt. Pardon? The motion failed. Okay. So it was not approved. Okay. Okay. So what is the next step? Appeal? Not legal. They haven't made a decision, so there's not a decision to appeal. They've just had a tie vote. I believe what staff traditionally recommend in discussions is to allow them to reapply, correct? Yes. The applicant can reapply and doesn't have to wait the full. You don't have to wait a year to reapply. You can reapply. Very good. Thank you. Did you say he has to wait a year? No, she said he does not have to wait a year because there was no decision made. So he could reapply. Okay. Are we done? Thank you. All right, thanks. All right. There's no fun. We have... I've lost track. Is it Sharon Newcomb? Is this the next one? Pershing? Nope. PLNBOA 24-111, Ellen Harshman. Good afternoon, please state your name for the record. My name is Ellen Harshman. This has been recommended for approval and there are four conditions that have been listed. Have you had an opportunity to look at those conditions? Yes, ma'am. one of those conditions include up to eight individuals no more than eight individuals did we see that are we comfortable with it yes we have so we have one um piece for support and one in opposition yeah we have the applicant signed in and then one person in opposition that's signed in all right did you want to tell us anything about the project before i let the oh this is my first house in in lexington in kentucky since 1998 was built in 1998 and when my first husband when my husband passed away i tried to to buy a new property in Richmond and it's been empty like 12 years. Sometimes I go there, sometimes I sleep there, family sleep there and have the weekend. But I didn't want to rent the property out because I always want to see it. I always want to clean it and maintain the property. And then just trying to think about what I should do with that. And I also have properties in the Philippines that are new. And trying to rent it. And from that moment, I started to think about what to do with my property in Lexington. So I convinced myself that it's okay to probably rent it out or short-term rental and move on and try to make a little bit of money for my children. My children, I still support my children, by the way. Okay, thank you. If you could sit for just a moment, we have some public comment regarding. Hi, my name is Susan, and I'm a homeowner who lives in her home on Gateway Park Circle. I've come to this committee today, took time off work today to ask you to please deny this zoning change. 22 years ago, I bought into the neighborhood with the idea that I was buying a home in a community alongside other people who owned their homes or who were long-term renters, that I would be part of a neighborhood and a community. And for a while this worked, I would lean over the back fence and talk to Crystal about her pets and her job, and I would have coffee with Karen on the other side and cat sit for her. However, short-term rentals have begun to encroach and have begun destroying the community. Instead of having people that I know next to me, I now have a short-term rental next to me. I have people who are there for a day or two. When I put up my fence seven years ago, this was not an STR, and I had long-term neighbors. I had long-term renters there. I literally put a low fence so that I could say hello to my neighbors whenever they were there and get to know them and ask them how they were, how their parents were, how are you doing? You know, just across the fence neighborly stuff. But now I have a short-term rental next to me, and we're talking about adding another to the neighborhood. The short-term rental next to me has had a series of loud parties that go until 2 or 3 in the morning with big bass booming, keeping the neighbors up. It houses a series of people who are not invested in the neighborhood or the community. I can't talk to these folks to say, hey, can you keep it down? I've got to go to work tomorrow. Would you pick up the garbage? It appears the critters have dragged it all over. And don't forget that tomorrow is garbage day. There's no relationship. These are temporary people. These are not my neighbors, and I'm tired of having not neighbors. If we add another short-term rental to the neighborhood, this will all be exacerbated. I'm frustrated with the short-term rentals. The lots in my neighborhood are small. We are close together. there's no getting away from. And you can see that in the picture. My house is to the left in those pictures. I've had to call the police on an underage party with more than 50 high schoolers. I've had to call the owners because I try to take this up with the owners. I try not to make it a city issue. I had to call the owners for noise complaints who were over there renting a house to have a party so they wouldn't mess their own house up. And the police came to the STR next because drug dealers had used it as a drug delivery spot. I've had to deal with the garbage, multiple pictures of garbage over time, and pests that that has created. And again, I've reported that to the owners and not to the city, because that's how I believe in handling problems. And then of course the cars for all the different parties that are taking over. I don't want more of this. I just heard Brandon Gross over here say that we needed 22,000 additional dwellings for families, and we are removing these when we do these short-term rentals. Long-term rental, I am fine with. You can get to know your neighbors in a long-term rental situation. So I'm asking you to please, and my neighborhood is an affordable neighborhood, so I'm asking you to please deny this. Anything else? We come back. Ms. Hartman. Did, I forget how many units did we identify? Just making sure she's not referring to my home, right? No, she's not. No, she was referring to a different property. What was that? Two? Okay. There's two other short-term rentals within 1,000 feet of the requested property. 0.5. 0.5%. I'm glad you remembered them, Harry. Okay. All right. Any other questions of the applicant? I will entertain a motion. madam chair i move for approval of plnboa 24-111 ellen v harshman's request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a single family residential zone on property located at 257 gateway park circle based on the staff's recommendation and the and the four conditions as listed thank you do we have a second thank you mr walker and we'll open for vote okay the motion is passed you have been approved good luck do i receive something in the mail or I don't know the process. Yes, we have another staff member that doesn't attend the meetings but is in our office, and she will send all the approved zoning compliance permits out tomorrow. And then your next step is to seek permission for a license through the Division of Revenue. Thank you. All right, the next item is PLN VOA 24-112, John Workman. Mr. Workman? I think we had one more abbreviated hearing for Newcomb. Oh, did I? Sharon Newcomb. There she is. She's in the back. Well, I had all the STRs together. Oh, I thought we were taking the short ones first. I thought we were too. Okay. The abbreviated ones first. I didn't know which was which. But that's okay. You want to switch the other? yeah if we could go ahead and take miss newcomb i don't think she had any opposition okay i'm sorry can we have present at the meeting anyway mr workman i'm sorry we had one before you so i would like to clarify we're on pln voa 24-116 that's sharon newcomb good afternoon if you could please state your name for the record Sharon Nuka and this has been recommended for approval there are four conditions that have been listed had you had opportunity to review those yes ma'am I have you comfortable with those okay is there anything you'd like to tell us about the project oh and I'm sorry I'm sorry we so we should have I'll get her come back she was recusing herself from do you want to get but she was recusing herself from the prior one yes yes I'm sorry hang on oh i called them in the wrong order i'm sorry okay okay so we're on um sharon newcomb tailman BOA 24-116. Okay. Thank you. Sorry about that. Anything you want to tell us about the project? No. You're tired too. I get it. This has been, like I said, recommended for approval. Did you live next door to this one? Yeah, I lived at 752 Pine. My sister lives at 756. Okay. I remember that. Do we have any questions, Ms. Applicant? For staff, didn't we do one on this same street that's right there behind? Not on Pine Street. We had some on High Street. Okay. I was remembering this area, so it was slightly higher percentage, but we had also decided because it was in the downtown vicinity. with the direct um you know really close to the i still call it rup arena central bank center and the yeah other tourism activities this is on the west side of the alt-tech brewery right and the other applications we had were on the east side gotcha okay thank you yeah because my concern is with the 36 short-term rentals operating within the thousand foot um that kind of almost takes out of neighborhood um it's on the other side or this side the 36. oh no the 36 are within a thousand feet of this property there are currently already 36. am i in the right place now in the distillery yes near the distillery district many of those are not ones you heard they were grandfathered in okay but so it's like a 17.1 thank you any other questions not i will entertain a motion i couldn't make a mention but it would be for disapproval just because of the sorry I would make a motion but just because of I think that we're really hitting this area hard with short-term rentals with the 17.1 percent and the 36 being within a thousand feet and I understand that this is a touristy area so to speak but I don't know it almost seems like a hotel to me with that area being too concentrated with short-term rentals I've never seen any in my area so i didn't know it was done in there oh she couldn't hear you could you i said i've never seen any rentals in my area so i didn't know there was any in there i've been there for 24 years james do you have the map for this particular application um potentially but i do know that there wasn't many close to this particular street that many of them were closer to central bank stadium um central bank center so you we don't have a map i had to check the powerpoint i don't know for sure i was just checking no that's okay so none in this neighborhood but close to the center okay all righty Any other questions or I'll entertain a motion. Oh, we have to make the motion. We do have a map. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I broke my other glasses so we'll work on this. Okay. With respect to PLN BOA 24116, Sharon Newcomb's request for a conditional use permit to operate a short-term rental on the property located at 752 Pine Street. I move for disapproval of the request based on the following fact. the evidence shows the actual concentration of short-term rentals within a thousand feet is close to 17.1 percent which reflects a high number in the area and could result in adverse influence on the surrounding neighborhood. Do we have a second? I'm going to second and it's just because it's if I'm going to keep hanging my hat on being a fundamental on this thing it's five percent is kind of the max 10 is double we're above triple and i'm not for for against any business i think you have to look at it as these are the parameters we've been set and we can fudge in one direction the other but this one i think is a little high so i'll second you mr okay we will open for vote it has been disapproved really yeah wow yikes okay our so what do i do now can i appeal i mean there is a right to appeal under krs 100. i believe staff typically has information that they give about that on request do you not okay so there is a right to appeal under krs 100 to fayette circuit court so there is a process for that that you can follow okay aside from that you'd have to wait a year to reapply yes that's true if you wanted to reapply you could but you'd have to wait a year to reapply unless you substantially changed your application in some way well that's true you could also run a long term but that's up to you do what now oh it could be oh i'm sorry mid to long term you can do long-term rental you can rent for 30 days or longer without an issue and i have to come back down there for that too no no like oh my gosh only for short-term rental okay thank you all right so our next one is pln doa 24-112 john workman and now you're recruiting huh recusing Okay, Mr. Workman, it has been recommended for approval. There are four conditions that have been listed to six individuals, but we do have several people here to speak. In opposition, would you like to tell us a little bit about your plans first? Yes, ma'am. I wrote a little letter for the board. Okay, please. Attendance as well. Thank you. I'm writing to request approval for a short-term rental permit for my property at 129 Bassett Avenue, located in the Kennewick neighborhood of Lexington, Kentucky. I'm confident that my request aligns with the community's best interests, and I would like to share my story and the reasons behind this application. I was born in 1991 and grew up in the house at 129 Bassett Avenue, where I developed a deep connection with the Kennewick neighborhood. In 2013, I joined the Marine Corps and was stationed in California. During my five years of active duty, I was deployed three times. In 2016, while I was serving, my mother passed away. She was currently living in our family home at the time, which she left to my brother and I. After my honorable discharge in 2018, I stayed in California briefly to obtain my RN license. Since then, I've returned to Lexington and have dedicated myself to renovating the house at 129 Bassett Avenue. These renovations have been both a tribute to my mother's memory and an effort to enhance the neighborhood's appeal. I'm currently an ICU nurse at St. Joseph Hospital in Lexington and plan to remain in this community for this foreseeable future. By applying for the short-term rental permit, I am to manage the property responsibly and while contributing positively to the local economy. Short-term rentals bring significant economic benefits, including increased tourism and support for local businesses. They offer visitors unique and personal experiences, often encouraging longer stays and repeat visits to our city. I understand that some neighbors may have concerns about short-term rentals. I am committed to being an exemplary property manager, ensuring that all tenants are thoroughly vetted and respectful to our community. Having grown up in this house and neighborhood, I have a deep appreciation for the area's character and vested interest in maintaining its integrity. Given my longstanding connection to this property and community, I believe I have the right to utilize my property in a way that honors my family's legacy and supports the neighborhood. I respectively ask for your consideration for approval of my short-term rental application. Thank you. Thank you. We will give an opportunity for public comment. We appreciate it. Chance is going to pass out some maps, and I'd like to submit a petition. Thank you, sir. You don't have to. He's passing them out. Hi. My name is Tommy Ross. Can I begin now? First, I'd like to say that you all put citizens through a lot of hell in this room. We come down here every month and sit here and wait until you all get ready to hear our complaints. And, you know, we're taxpayers. So it's me again. I'm Tommy Ross, and I've been coming to speak to you against STRs in Kenwick and Mintel every month since January. Usually I give the standard information. There are 42 STRs in Kenwick and Mintel. There are six within 1,000 square feet of 129 Bassett Avenue, and there are three within 500 square feet. This time we gathered 41 signatures on a petition opposing the STR at 129 Bassett Avenue. We concentrated in the area right around the STR, So these are the people who live around it who signed this petition. We also had 15 letters and emails in opposition to the application. I usually remind you all that STRs take affordable houses off the market at a time when Lexington has a severe housing shortage. I also tell you about several of my neighbors who have had to move because they couldn't afford to rent in Kenwick anymore or had to sell their homes because they couldn't afford the property taxes. Yes, a concentration of STRs in a neighborhood does raise rents and home prices and property taxes. It also increases food insecurity as residents have to decide between rent, utilities, and food. And it increases isolation and loneliness as people learn to live without neighbors. But this time I'm going to tell you about me. You see, I'm afraid that I know what you see when I stand at this podium every month. I mean, I'm a 66-year-old woman, and I'm here every month like a frequent flyer to the emergency department. Maybe you think I'm a hypochondriac finding problems where none exist, or maybe I'm just an old woman who wants attention. But here's my story. I'm a 39-year resident of Kenwick. I bought a house there in 1985 for $58,000, and I spent 25 years fixing it up. In 2003, the house was struck by lightning and burned down, and I built a new house with an old house look on the same lot. I've had a job for 20 years in planning, development, and construction, so I'm not naive about these things. I work for UK Health Care and I know a little bit about planning, construction, and I know a lot about displacing neighborhoods and what happens when developers start to think that they have eminent domain. I know about zoning ordinances and I know about their loopholes. I'm not here because I want to be. I don't want to spend 40 hours every month working on the STR situation in my neighborhood. And I don't want to spend eight or 10 hours down here once a month. So please, once and for all, put a moratorium on STRs in Kenwick and Mantell at least until the new ordinance has passed and please deny this application. Thank you. I'm Judy Humble. I'm also a resident of Kenwick. I live at 144 Lincoln Avenue and I've owned a house there for 24 years. And when I bought that house, I didn't just buy a house. I bought a neighborhood. And I bought a neighborhood that I knew about because of friends who lived there. I knew it would be populated with people like me who shared my values. And I also knew it was cohesive, that there was really a sense of community there. So I didn't just want a house, or I would have bought one much less expensive than the one I paid for in Kenwick. And I heard the gentleman who's got the application in talk about how STRs are good for the economy. They bring tourists in. I'm an economy. Tommy's an economy. We contribute to the economy with the money we spend on our houses, the people we hire to take care of them, to remodel them, to repair them, to introduce energy efficiency measures. We put a lot of money into the economy by owning these houses. I will also say that the range of criteria you all have been given to deny applications seems overly narrow to me based on my research. So the Kenwick neighbors who were concerned about this put together a research team to study the impact of STRs across the country. And we didn't find any research saying that they were good for communities. We found the opposite. And Tommy has mentioned some of the factors. They remove housing from the available stock for people who want to be homeowners and that includes affordable housing. Lexington has a housing crisis. I know people who've bought a house on the spot because there was so much competition for that particular house. We have a housing shortage, and when you have a housing shortage, you all have a shortage of rental units. So STRs, the unhosted ones, remove affordable housing from the market. They cause an increase in rental prices, and sometimes they decrease homeownership opportunities for people of color. They also create rifts and disruptions in the social fabric of the neighborhood. So I have neighbors on all sides of me who have contributed to my well-being. They watch out for my dog. They tell me when he's out. They tell me about roof leaks I didn't know I have. They help me find out when car lights have been left on. They provide a range of services that have been really very helpful to me in living in my home. So when you have STRs in a neighborhood, you're creating rifts in the social fabric. and I'm also a mental health professional. This problem of social isolation that Tommy mentioned is so severe that my profession is doing seminars on how to combat social isolation in our time. So Kenwick is pretty saturated with STRs for a small neighborhood. We are at, I think, 2.3% according to those statistics, and if you look at a map, you can really see how they proliferated. And so I think we have enough in Kenwick. we have enough in the city, but particularly in Kenwick. And for all those reasons, I would like for you to turn this application down. Thank you. Thank you. Hi there. My name is Charles Haidt. I live at 929 Aurora. First of all, I want to thank Mr. Workman for his service to our country. That should be honored as his family's legacy should be honored. But all of us have families too. Tommy only beats me by one year. I've been in Kenwick for 38 years, and I want you to think about the Kenwick neighborhood. We are not a tourist mecca. Everything between National Avenue and East Main, with the exception of two little corner groceries, is solid residential. Solid residential. And I want those of you sitting on the board today to think of your own neighborhoods. If you live in a predominantly or solid residential neighborhood, I don't think you would like it if one out of every 20 homes, one out of every 20 of your neighbors were taken away for a short-term rental. That's what we're talking about in Kenwick right now, and it's just getting worse. You all see that map in front of you. The percentages vary on where you draw the circle. Last month we were in here and we hit a 4.9% percentage of short-term rentals within the circle. Number one, the 5% is very arbitrary and your circles are too small. We don't split Kenwick up into sub-neighborhoods. Kenwick and Mentel are solidly against short-term rentals. I was one of the people that helped collect those signatures on that petition that we turned in today. The only blanks on that sheet are people that weren't home. Every door I knocked on where somebody answered, they signed the petition. There was no opposition this time. And last month when I did it, only one out of the 50 people said no. And that's because they lived across the street from the subject property and were close friends with the person who wanted to do it. So like the people before me and the people that are going to come after me, I beg of you to please turn down this application and slow the onslaught of short-term rentals in Kenwick and in Mintel. Thank you very much. My name is Kay Myers. My family has lived in Kenwick for 50 years. I live in the house that my father and mother bought and that I was married in. I put on my uniform and I come down because the neighborhood is in trouble again. So I'm here every month with my uniform and the same speech. I sat this morning trying to imagine a new way to express concern or to defend the integrity of the neighborhood to you yet again like we've done month after month after month. But the truth of the matter is our circumstances, no matter how you want to wiggle your circles, are still the same. And our problems are still there. The neighborhood is saturated. Two months ago, your own planning staff identified a 4.7% saturation. That's what we're talking about, move the circles. Doesn't matter. One this way, one that way. Your circle that you're looking at today, you take that 1,000 feet, and you hang across and talk to the neighbor across the back fence, and you've got six more that you can add to that number that's around 129. The neighborhood is full of STRs. If you even take the 2.7 that they want to put on the circle today, that is a hair's breadth from the 3% that the new council proposals, I know they're not in yet, but they've been favorably received and they have been advanced. This is what you're going to be looking at. So you might as well get used to thinking in terms of that percentage. But you're taking 42 middle class working homes, unavailable, out of contributing to the housing crisis that we're in right now. What's left of our Herald Leader reported last week that because of the expanded urban services area, it's going to take at least $570 million to add those 2,800 acres into some sort of semblance of neighborhoods. And that does not include local roadways, stormwater, water lines, or new schools. And it also does not include ongoing costs for additions to staff, to police, all those things that you're going to have to have. Now, the comforting part of Beth Musgrave's article was that 90% of it was going to be covered by the developers. Well, where's the affordable housing when you talk about those numbers? That leaves $53 million that the city is going to have to make up, $53 million plus. Now I don't know how you do the math, but that's a lot of money per unit. And this is our affordable housing, so don't take one more away. Keep it at $21,999 for Mr. Gross since he's not here. Thank you. My name is Carol Myers. I'm another resident of Kenwick. I've lived in Kenwick except for seven years in the 90s from 1985 to now. It is a fabulous neighborhood, and short-term rentals are killing us. Everybody else has said compelling true things to me as well. So I hope you vote against this short-term rental. Thank you. Thank you. Let's see. Do you have anyone else? okay mr workman any rebuttal or anything additional you'd like to offer I don't have any more comments at this time thank you thank you do we have any questions of the applicant that was down to just this side I can quit looking over here Are you ready for a motion? Okay. I will. I would be opposed to this request from this applicant. I think the neighbors have stated it better than I can at this point because it is an adverse effect on the housing market. and the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood because not being able to have housing does affect your welfare, especially for the workforce people. And this house is approximately, I would guess, in a $360,000 range, and so it would be affordable. it causes as the neighbors said it causes a displacement of residents in that if the that maybe they can't afford that that neighborhood but mainly I would be opposed because the advance adverse effect on affordable housing and the housing shortage as we all are aware. Can I say one thing? Can I make a motion? Oh, I'm sorry. It was legal to write it. Oh, I'm sorry. The applicant wanted to speak. She said it would be affordable to working force. It's a family home. No matter what, I'm not going to get rid of it. If I can't, if I get disapproved today, I'll probably rent it out to travel nurses. It's not going to be sold. they're just going to remain in the family forever so okay i agree okay what did you no i think she's already done it right okay let's roll Madam Chair, I move with regard to PLM-BLA 24112, John Workman's request for a conditional use permit to operate a short-term rental on property located at 129 Bassett Street. I move for disapproval of the request based on the following finding of fact. The evidence shows that possibly over 40 short-term rentals already exist within this neighborhood, with possibly four operating on Bassett Avenue, which reflects a high concentration in the area and allowing more short-term rentals could result in an adverse influence on the surrounding neighborhood. it's so moved thank you and do i have a second okay mrs sturderman has seconded so we will open for vote and i um we'll just make a comment on this one in particular it is i and i appreciate you guys coming down every month and it is a very popular neighborhood in that area and i do state it slightly differently than i did being in the downtown area it's not quite a it doesn't have the same um tourist um location so i can definitely make the argument but i was also surprised with the percentages this month being different so different from last month but we are being consistent on the thousand thousand yard radius so i feel like i have to consistent if just give me just a moment i'm sorry you folks have to have to be here very long as long as you have and uh i heard here that i hear the comment about you you've been here all all day and so have we so uh it's it's not just our audience but we're here too and um but let me say we this board is is not the board that makes the the laws the rules and we are here to support the ordinance as it is written, basically. Now, I know we have some leeway, but we tried very hard to be just as strict as we can based on what the laws say. I don't think anybody has been more proactive than I have been in talking to the council about the problems that we're facing here. Every time we meet, we have these problems. We know you all don't want more SDRs. I certainly wouldn't want them either. And if the council would go along with a moratorium on more SDRs, I think that would be great. That's the way I feel. But we have to take the ordinance in mind. So I have driven down the streets of Kenwick. And it's funny. I can tell which houses are STRs, the way they've decorated their porches, and you can tell. And I know how many there are, and I've seen the charts. And so I want you all to understand that we are subject to what the council has done, but I think the council has worked very hard to change this, and you all know that, because I hear you telling me what the new laws are going to be. And that's because we have, it's not you all, but we have done some of the same work ourselves in trying to convince the council that, you know, these are problems and we need to deal with it. And so I think the new rules are going to be better. It's not going to solve the problems, but it's going to be a lot better. And I think in this particular case, if the new laws were in effect, the new ordinance was in effect, I think it would be very clear for us to say, no, we can't do this. But I want you all to understand that we do have feelings about how you feel about it. We really do. And I beg the council to take time and to rewrite the law. As I say, it's going to be better, but it's not going to be perfect. I can tell that already. But I just wanted to say that before we vote. We appreciate you all coming down and spending this evening with us. Can I say one more thing? When I grew up in Kenwick as a teenager, I lived on the first block, 129. It goes down towards the third block. The third block is somewhere you would never want to go, like even in broad daylight, because you get robbed, beat up. I get chased on my bike by kids out of the neighborhood back to my block to go back to first block. I think short-term rentals have been actually a good thing for the third blocks closer to the train tracks. I can't really, I haven't looked at all the research that they've been saying today, but there's good and bad for short-term rentals. And one good thing for the neighborhood of Kenwick is that it is a brighter neighborhood because of short-term rentals. My mom lived there. I've seen the transition from you would never go down to third block Bassett to now I walk my dog there every single day. So I just wanted to say that. We appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. So we'll take a vote. The motion on the floor is to disapprove. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. And we have our last one, I believe. Thank you, Mr. Perryman. Bob, can you get our friends? Hey, Bob. Bob, can you get Linda and Chad? Mm-hm. Give us just a moment to. No problem. All right, Mr. Perryman, so we have been recommended for approval here, and there are four conditions that have been listed. Have you had an opportunity to review those? I have. Okay, and do you have any questions or concerns about those? Yeah, I had one point of clarification. So I've had this short-term rental since 2022, and I did put in my application for this one along with the other one that I own back in 2023. There was a bit of confusion, so I have proof where I submitted that, but whenever I submitted it, it asked me a max occupancy, and it was 14. So as I submitted that, then they told me it goes to a separate approval from the ones that were max occupancy of 12. So I needed to wait on that approval to go through. So I waited. My other one was approved because it was maximum occupancy of 12. And then so then I reached out again in January, like a week before the grandfathering period closed. And they told me, you know, we have this many applications. years is halfway through or something like that, so you just have to be patient. So I waited and I didn't hear anything back. And I found out later that my application was actually lost because there was some turnover within the department. So that was very confusing to me in that now I should have, in my mind, been grandfathered into 12 and then applying for 14, if that makes sense, because I was within that grandfathering period. Everything that they've told me to do, I've done. They told me to remove my listing and everything. I've done that and waited for this to come through. So I guess my question now, since it seems I haven't been grandfathered into 12 on that property, am I being heard for 12 and 14 today, both? Or I did see that they recommended for approval for 12, which I do appreciate, but I wanted to know if I was also being under approval for 14 as well as a separate vote or if it's only for 12 today. Staff? Staff found that he did not provide sufficient justification for 14, but he did meet the requirements to have an occupancy of up to 12. Okay. So the application was for greater than 12, but they're offering approval based on 12. So 12 is the amount that the staff has recommended that we approve. I guess the clarification that I'm not trying to argue or anything with that, but being that I did get my application in before the grandfathering period, but the fact that it went to a separate process for 14, I guess I'm confused why I wasn't grandfathered into 12 as well. He never asked for a zoning compliance permit for up to 12. Okay, I guess that, and I understand, if that's the process, I understand. I'm not trying to argue, like I said, but I'm just confused by that because whenever I submitted it, they told me there was nothing else I needed to do. I even got an email telling me do not submit another application for your property. I have the email right here, it says do not submit another application for your property. If you have submitted an application, that's the only one. So I guess I just didn't see in the process where I was also supposed to submit a separate application. for 12 to be grandfathered in, if that makes sense. So I guess I'm just confused on that process of when I was supposed to do that. And from the people I talked to, I thought I was good for 12 and I was just waiting for 14. So that's where I'm just confused by that part. Okay. Okay. So clarification on that planning staff, we're voting for 12 today? You're voting for 12, but you can approve them for 14 if you choose to. you know it's gonna say staff has recommended up to twelve we could uh... or if he's wanting more than fourteen we would look at that you can make the decision to do that but that this is the process now so for twelve or fourteen that the process is required to go before the board and will make a decision based on that and i respect that and then and you did mentioned so the distinction between the 12 and 14 did you want to tell us a little bit about the property and yes i would love to um yeah first i want to just address everybody anybody that might be here from the neighborhood and you all as well just kind of my heart behind the whole the whole thing and i'll try to keep it brief i know we've been here a long time but um i am very passionate about it this is a family house you know it's not an investor group that's not connected to the property we own it personally with our family uh... i am personally available twenty four seven to the guests i don't you know it's not a separate management company or anything like that uh... so i personally and in contact with the guests on a daily basis twenty four seven some available to them we love the city that's why we've lived here since we moved here in two thousand ninety go to the u k i mean my wife and my kids uh... we love the city and we always recommend to our guests local businesses and restaurants we have a guest book for them trying to funnel them all to our to the local and city as well and we love the neighborhood whenever we first bought the property in 2022 we walked to the neighborhood knocked on doors and met the neighbors offered them our phone numbers so that we're personally available to the neighbors as well if there's ever any issue with the house or anything like that uh... and so we love the neighborhood we love the city that's why we're doing this i have a heart for hospitality and that's why I started doing this full time with my short-term rental properties. The house itself, as far as space-wise, we have room in actual beds for every single guest up to 14 or definitely up to 12. But we have actual beds. Some Airbnbs may use couches and other things like that that qualify as beds, but we have an actual bed space for every single guest. There are two bedrooms upstairs in which we have two beds. They're, in a sense, double bedrooms. There's a cutout on the end where there's an additional bed space. It's just through an open doorway. So those bedrooms upstairs, that's why we're able to have the higher capacity in a five-bedroom. The house itself is 3,254 square feet and five-bedroom and five-bath. So there's ample space for all of the guests. We actually have two full living spaces upstairs. We have a living space with couches. We have downstairs in the basement a living space with couches. and we also have just an extra theater room for guests as well. So we've tried to provide plenty of space for guests to spread out within the house so that as much as possible they would be happy to be contained within the house and so that we would not be disturbing the outside of the neighborhood as well. The house actually has two full kitchens which are fully equipped for guests as well so they have plenty of space in there and more than enough to utilize. And so then going into the neighborhood and the surrounding area, I just want to say we are very, very, we spend a lot of focus on making sure that we are not disruptive to the community and that we are respectful of the community. So from a noise standpoint, we do not allow parties or events at any kind at this house. We make that very clear in the rules. They have to sign onto these rules before they even book our property. We uphold the quiet hours. We put that into the listing as well and in our rules. The guests, like I said, provided that up front so they know that before they book. We have steep penalties for any type of noise disturbance, any type of complaints, any type of violation of these rules. We do have penalties for guests and they see that up front. We also vet every guest before our bookings. So they have to write in and tell me why they're going to be in the city, what they're using the house for so that we know that they are not just trying to rent out for a party house. because we're never going to allow that type of thing. We also don't allow single night bookings because that would be a higher risk for it being some type of property, especially if it was a local guest trying to book a big house for a party. We do not allow a single night booking, so that is a way that we also would curtail that. And through our time since 2022 of hosting before the new regulations kicked in, we have not had any issues with that, not had any complaints or disturbances or any type of parties that would have damaged the house at all or anything like that. No parties have been there. And then on top of that, I guess the best proof that I have that we can satisfy that requirement of the noise and the space and everything is just the empirical proof that we did own it since 2022 and we were able to have this property without any type of complaints or any worries of overcrowding or anything like that. And we take great pride in delivering a five-star guest experience as well as just taking care and respecting our neighborhood. And so the other thing is from our guests, we only allow guests to have all five-star reviews in their history and have no negative marks from Airbnb as well. So that we get, we're very careful about what guests we allow into the neighborhood and into our home. So that is my heart behind it all. the proof i believe that we have in order to support that without being a disturbance to the neighborhood or anything like that so okay thank you i think are these folks here to speak okay good evening i'll be brief my name is una mccarthy i'm head of school of the lexington school but i'm also a neighbor i live a couple hundred yards i thought i saw you you saw me earlier. Our only concern here is the amount of people and the intended audience that may come with the high number of people who can rent the house. It's not the rental itself, it's just the high number and what the intended audience and who may come. The property borders the Lexington School, which is an elementary school, and down the street is Beaumont Middle School. So there's two, an elementary and a middle school, both within touching distances of the house, our concern is the high number of occupancies. Thank you. Anyone else? No? Okay. Yes. Thank you, Ms. McCarthy. I had the chance to talk to her a little bit earlier during one of the recesses, and she approached me and gave me that concern. And so, yeah, that's definitely something that we're very aware of. And I will tell you that the great majority of our guests have just been families that have come and want a larger space that they can share with their family, as opposed to renting out multiple hotel rooms or something like that and being separated. So a great majority of our guests are just families or a couple families that come in with kids and just want a bigger area where their kids can run around and sleep and all be in the same place. So I appreciate that concern, and that is definitely something that we consider. I just had a weird question. So on the PBA, it says that four or five people own this house. Yes, that's our family. So that's me and my wife, her mom and dad, and then her brother and sister. Yeah, so I think there might be five or six of us on the actual deed, yes. You should get an LLC. No, I'm not giving legal advice. Yeah. Well, they told me when I got to get an LLC, I would have to start this process over. So I didn't want to. Oh yeah, not during this. Yeah. Yeah. Are we at 12 or how many? Well, what is your request? Conditions states 12. But his request was for more than 12. So we could either go with the conditions or we could adjust the conditions. Yeah, and I guess to be frank, I obviously don't want to risk not being approved at a higher occupancy. So if those were two separate votes, I'd be very comfortable with that. are recommending approval for 12 and obviously i just this is um this is my livelihood this is our family's business and we just i want to make sure that give the best chance it can to be approved today and so whatever that takes um we'd be happy to and just for clarification while i staff the the calculation would be up to 14 with the five bedrooms yes the only um the only property that has ever been uh allowed for up to 14 was a six bedroom um okay three thousand four hundred and eighty five square foot uh home okay well sounds safe what i'm saying is that the one of the four conditions um say it's limited to no no more than 12 individuals so that's basically what we're voting on and so the uh the motion would have to would have to state that that corrects well unless we modify that condition that's a recommendation yes yes so we're on the same page so yes so for instance if i if i made the motion would without without the greater than 12 and the and the condition number two i think it's number two states 12 then that's what we'd be voting on is that correct staff okay that is correct is that a motion i will make this motion but i need to read Okay, please do. I move for approval of PLN BOA 24-121, Patrick Perriman's request for an initial use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a single family residential zone on property located at 257 Gateway Park. Oh, 1037. 1037. Is it 237? No, Juniper. Juniper. I'm sorry. Yeah, no. 1037. I'm sorry, yeah. Yeah, I'm sorry. It's been a long day. Yes. In a single-family residential zone, a property located at 1037 Juniper Drive, based on the staff's recommendation and the four conditions as listed. I have a second. Second. I'll also say that I noticed immediately that it was next door to Lexington School. I thought that was a condition that at least we ought to eliminate it at 12. Madam Chair, may I make comments? Yes, you may. Okay. Thank you for the motion, but I would be opposed because, again, this is a house that is 300-plus range, which would be a residence for a permanent person. Someone dwelling in Lexington and serving as in the workforce. That and the proximity to two schools would make it a particularly desirable residence for a permanent person. So just my comments, thank you. Thank you. Am I able to respond to that as well? Or? No. all righty anything else from the board we'll take a vote so is this for up to 12. for up to 12 yes just as it was Motion is passed. Thank you. Thank you all so much for your time. I appreciate it. Okay, are there any other board items that could happen really quickly before I fall out the chair? Okay. Any other staff items with the same criteria? very quickly before i fall off the chair no okay our next meeting will be uh october 14th at 1 30 and uh we are adjourned