# Board of Adjustment Meeting - May 12, 2025 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Board · May 12, 2025 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6427 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6427?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2025-05-12 - **Body**: Board - **Last revised**: March 28, 2026 - **Length**: 19,168 words - **Speakers**: Chair > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1, with speaker labels folded in from Granicus closed-captioning. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and 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 May 12, 2025, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers at 200 East Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky, with Raquel Carter presiding. The board worked through 9 agenda items consisting of variance requests and conditional use permit applications from a range of individual and organizational applicants. Of the items heard, 8 were approved and 1 was denied — a variance request by John Workman — while approved items included requests by David Tipton, Cara Meade, Roman Catholic Bishop Diocese of Lexington, Angel Investments LLC, Embry Property Management LLC, Compound Property LLC, Dr. Jitender Dudee, and BK Wholesome Homes. Over the course of the meeting, the board heard 13 public comments and took 13 votes. ## Attendance All seven board members were present at the May 12, 2025 meeting. No members were absent or late. **Present:** - Raquel Carter - Linda Tucker - Chad Walker - Harry Clarke - James Persley - Branden Gross - Bob Sturdivant ## Votes and Decisions The Board took action on 13 items during the May 12, 2025 meeting. No transcript timestamps are available for any of the votes below. **Postponements and Withdrawals** - **PLN-BOA-25-00037** — Motion by Branden Gross, seconded by Harry Clarke, to postpone the Cherish the Child Daycare conditional use permit request. Approved unanimously, 7–0. - **PLN-BOA-25-00051** — Motion by Branden Gross, seconded by Bob Sturdivant, to postpone the Two Fisted Willies conditional use permit request. Approved unanimously, 7–0. - **PLN-BOA-25-00041** — Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Linda Tucker, to postpone Chad Walker's conditional use permit request. Approved 6–0 with 1 abstention. Voting in favor: Raquel Carter, Linda Tucker, Harry Clarke, James Persley, Branden Gross, and Bob Sturdivant. - **PLN-BOA-25-00042** — Motion by Branden Gross, seconded by Bob Sturdivant, to withdraw Carol Robinson's variance request. Approved unanimously, 7–0. **Variance Requests** - **PLN-BOA-25-00013** — Motion by Branden Gross, seconded by James Persley, to approve David Tipton's variance request. Approved unanimously, 7–0. Subject to three conditions: construction in accordance with application materials and site plan, conformance with Chevy Chase Neighborhood Design Standards, and obtaining necessary permits. - **PLN-BOA-25-00038** — Motion by Branden Gross, seconded by James Persley, to disapprove John Workman's variance request. The motion to disapprove carried unanimously, 7–0. - **PLN-BOA-25-00044** — Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by Bob Sturdivant, to approve Cara Meade's variance request. Approved unanimously, 7–0. Subject to two conditions: construction in accordance with application materials and site plan, and obtaining necessary permits. **Conditional Use Permits** - **PLN-BOA-25-00049** — Motion by Harry Clarke, seconded by James Persley, to approve the Roman Catholic Bishop Diocese of Lexington's conditional use permit. Approved unanimously, 7–0. Subject to three conditions, including maintaining existing vegetation. - **PLN-BOA-25-00043** — Motion by Branden Gross, seconded by James Persley, to approve Angel Investments LLC's conditional use permit. Approved unanimously, 7–0. Subject to four conditions, including occupancy limited to six individuals. - **PLN-BOA-25-00045** — Motion by Raquel Carter, seconded by Chad Walker, to approve Embry Property Management LLC's conditional use permit. Approved unanimously, 7–0. Subject to four conditions, including occupancy limited to six individuals. - **PLN-BOA-25-00046** — Motion by Branden Gross, seconded by James Persley, to approve Compound Property LLC's conditional use permit. Approved unanimously, 7–0. Subject to four conditions, including occupancy limited to six individuals. - **PLN-BOA-25-00047** — Motion by Raquel Carter, seconded by Chad Walker, to approve Dr. Jitender Dudee's conditional use permit. Approved 6–0 with 1 abstention. Voting in favor: Raquel Carter, Linda Tucker, Chad Walker, Harry Clarke, James Persley, and Bob Sturdivant. Subject to seven conditions, including occupancy limited to sixteen individuals. - **PLN-BOA-25-00050** — Motion by Raquel Carter, seconded by James Persley, to approve BK Wholesome Homes' conditional use permit. Approved unanimously, 7–0. Subject to four conditions, including occupancy limited to eight individuals. ## Public Comment Thirteen members of the public addressed the Board during the May 12, 2025 meeting. No transcript timestamps were available for any of the comments. The majority of speakers voiced opposition to one or more short-term rental applications under consideration. Key concerns raised included: - **Property maintenance and condition:** Wayne Stevenson described specific maintenance issues and concerns about the condition of the property at 533 Southridge Drive. Janie Griggs and Fran Hardaway similarly cited property upkeep and neighborhood ambiance as reasons for their opposition. - **Safety:** Fran Hardaway, Sharon Gill, and Jay Morgan Schaffo each raised safety concerns, with Schaffo specifically noting the impact of transient guests on community familiarity and neighborhood cohesion. - **Noise and parking:** Jean Barnet expressed concern about potential increased noise and its impact on the neighborhood. Samuel Perry opposed the short-term rental at 1770 Yorktown Road, citing parking, noise, and neighborhood character. Dylan Adams raised similar concerns about traffic, noise, and neighborhood character regarding the short-term rental at 712 Grafton Mills Lane. - **Neighborhood character and housing:** Virginia McKee emphasized the need for family homes in the neighborhood, while Patricia Hall raised concerns about the broader impact of short-term rentals on community resources and neighborhood character. Michael Rogers spoke to concerns about maintenance and the challenges posed by an unhosted short-term rental in his neighborhood. - **Agricultural and nuisance concerns:** Catherine Perkins raised concerns about agricultural uses and potential nuisances related to a short-term rental on Paris Pike. Outside of the short-term rental discussion, Bartley Hagerman spoke in opposition to David Tipton's variance request, sharing pictures and citing concerns about property impact and trespassing. Jean Barnet's noise concerns also appeared related to a specific use under review rather than a short-term rental application. ## Contested Items - **Short-Term Rental Approvals** During the May 12, 2025 Board meeting, short-term rental approvals emerged as a point of community opposition. Several community members raised concerns about the effects of short-term rentals on their neighborhoods, citing impacts on neighborhood character, safety, and housing availability. The opposition came from members of the public participating in the meeting. No outcome, vote result, or Board resolution on this item is recorded in the available meeting data. ## Variance Request by David Tipton (PLN-BOA-25-00013) The Board considered a variance request submitted by David Tipton for a property located at 218 Chenault Road. Tipton sought to reduce the required side yard setback from ten feet to five feet. Key speakers on this item included David Tipton and Bartley Hagerman. Staff recommended approval of the variance with conditions. The Board ultimately approved the request. ## Variance Request by John Workman (PLN-BOA-25-00038) The Board considered a variance request submitted by John Workman seeking to reduce the required front yard setback from five feet to zero feet in order to pave two driveways at 732 Florence Avenue. Key speakers on this item included John Workman, the applicant, and Chris Oney. Staff had recommended disapproval of the request prior to the Board's consideration. The Board ultimately **denied** the variance request. ## Variance Request by Cara Meade **Case No. PLN-BOA-25-00044** The Board considered a variance request submitted by Cara Meade to reduce the required front yard setback for a corner lot in order to construct a swimming pool at **616 Autumn Lane**. Key speakers on this item included **Cara Meade**, the applicant, and **Joseph Fields**. Staff had recommended **disapproval** of the variance request ahead of the meeting, raising concerns about the proposed reduction to the front yard setback requirements applicable to the corner lot configuration at the property. Despite the staff recommendation against approval, the Board ultimately voted to **approve** the variance request, allowing Meade to proceed with plans to construct the swimming pool under the reduced front yard setback. *No transcript timestamp is available for this agenda item.* ## Conditional use permit request by Roman Catholic Bishop Diocese of Lexington **Case No. PLN-BOA-25-00049** The Board considered a conditional use permit request submitted by the Roman Catholic Bishop Diocese of Lexington to amend an existing use for a school in order to construct an accessory structure at 2250 Clays Mill Road. Key speakers on this item included Rory Cayley and Rob Rumke. Staff recommended approval of the request. The Board voted to approve the conditional use permit. ## Conditional use permit request by Angel Investments LLC **Case No. PLN-BOA-25-00043** The Board considered a conditional use permit request submitted by Angel Investments LLC for an un-hosted short-term rental located at 3713 Lady Di Lane. Key speakers on this item included Chloe Long and Michael Rogers. Staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit. The Board reviewed the request and, following presentation and discussion, voted to approve the permit as recommended by staff. ## Conditional use permit request by Embry Property Management LLC The Board considered agenda item PLN-BOA-25-00045, a conditional use permit request submitted by Embry Property Management LLC for an un-hosted short-term rental located at 533 Southridge Drive. Staff presented the application and recommended approval of the conditional use permit. Key speakers on this item included Wayne Stevenson and Fran Hardaway. The Board ultimately approved the conditional use permit request. ## Conditional use permit request by Compound Property LLC The Board considered case **PLN-BOA-25-00046**, a conditional use permit request submitted by **Compound Property LLC** for an un-hosted short-term rental located at **1770 Yorktown Road**. Key speakers on this item included **Samuel Perry** and **Jay Morgan Schaffo**. Staff presented the request and recommended approval of the conditional use permit. The Board ultimately **approved** the conditional use permit request. ## Conditional use permit request by Dr. Jitender Dudee **Case No. PLN-BOA-25-00047** The Board considered a conditional use permit request submitted by Dr. Jitender Dudee for an un-hosted short-term rental with an occupancy greater than 10 at 3284 Paris Pike. Key speakers on this item included Lauren Nichols and Catherine Perkins. Staff recommended approval of the permit request. The Board voted to approve the conditional use permit. *Note: Transcript timestamps are not available for this agenda item.* ## Conditional use permit request by BK Wholesome Homes **Case No. PLN-BOA-25-00050** The Board considered a conditional use permit request submitted by BK Wholesome Homes for an un-hosted short-term rental located at **712 Grafton Mills Lane**. Key speakers on this item included **Brandon Whitehead** and **Dylan Adams**. Staff presented the request and recommended **approval** of the conditional use permit. The Board considered the application as presented. The permit was ultimately **approved**. --- ## Decisions - **PLN-BOA-25-00037** — postponed (7-0): Postpone Cherish the Child Daycare conditional use permit request - **PLN-BOA-25-00051** — postponed (7-0): Postpone Two Fisted Willies conditional use permit request - **PLN-BOA-25-00041** — postponed (6-0): Postpone Chad Walker's conditional use permit request - **PLN-BOA-25-00042** — withdrawn (7-0): Withdraw Carol Robinson's variance request - **PLN-BOA-25-00013** — passed (7-0): Approve David Tipton's variance request - **PLN-BOA-25-00038** — failed (0-7): Disapprove John Workman's variance request - **PLN-BOA-25-00044** — passed (7-0): Approve Cara Meade's variance request - **PLN-BOA-25-00049** — passed (7-0): Approve Roman Catholic Bishop Diocese of Lexington's conditional use permit request - **PLN-BOA-25-00043** — passed (7-0): Approve Angel Investments LLC's conditional use permit request - **PLN-BOA-25-00045** — passed (7-0): Approve Embry Property Management LLC's conditional use permit request - **PLN-BOA-25-00046** — passed (7-0): Approve Compound Property LLC's conditional use permit request - **PLN-BOA-25-00047** — passed (6-0): Approve Dr. Jitender Dudee's conditional use permit request - **PLN-BOA-25-00050** — passed (7-0): Approve BK Wholesome Homes' conditional use permit request --- ## Full transcript Yeah, uh-huh, I wanna do it till the sun comes up Oh, yeah, uh-huh, I wanna do it till I can't get enough Yeah, yeah, uh-huh, I wanna put on my, my, my, my, my boogie shoes Just runnin' with you Well, I wanna put on my, my, my, my, my boogie shoes Just runnin' with you Uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh, yeah Boogie down, boogie down I wanna put on my, my, my, my, my boogie shoes Just runnin' with you Yeah, I wanna put on my, my, my, my, my boogie shoes Just runnin' with you Yeah, I wanna put on my, my, my, my, my boogie shoes Just runnin' with you Yeah, I wanna put on my, my, my, my, my boogie shoes Just runnin' with you Yeah, I wanna put on my, my, my, my, my boogie shoes Just runnin' with you Yeah I spent last night in the arms of a girl in Louisiana And though I'm out on the highway, my thoughts are still with her Such a strange combination of a woman and a child Such a strange situation, stoppin' every hundred miles Callin' Baton Rouge A replay of last night's events rolls through my mind Except a scene or two erased by sweet red wine And I see a truck stop, sign ahead, so I change lanes I need a cup of coffee and a couple dollars change Callin' Baton Rouge Operator, won't you put me on through? I gotta send my love down to Baton Rouge Hurry up, won't you put her on the line? I gotta talk to the girl just one more time Hey! Hello, Samantha dear, I hope you're feelin' fine And it won't be long until I'm with you all the time But until then, I'll spend my money up right down to my last dime Callin' Baton Rouge Operator, won't you put me on through? I gotta send my love down to Baton Rouge Hurry up, won't you put her on the line? I gotta talk to the girl just one more time Callin' Baton Rouge Sweet Baton Rouge Operator, won't you put me on through? My Baton Rouge Cecilia, you're breakin' my heart You're shakin' my confidence daily Oh, Cecilia, I'm down on my knees I'm beggin' you please to come home Cecilia, you're breakin' my heart You're shakin' my confidence daily Oh, Cecilia, I'm down on my knees I'm beggin' you please to come home Home, home, home Makin' love in the afternoon Cecilia, you're up in my bedroom I got up to wash my face When I go back to bed, someone's takin' my place Cecilia, you're breakin' my heart You're shakin' my confidence daily Oh, Cecilia, I'm down on my knees I'm beggin' you please to come home Come on home Go, go, go, go, go Go, go, go, go, go Go, go, go, go Pick it up, pick it up Pick it up, pick it up Pick it up, pick it up Cumulation, she loves me again I fall on the floor and I'm laughing Cumulation, she loves me again I fall on the floor and I'm laughing Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh Here come old Flat Top Here come groovin' up slowly Got juju eyeball He want holy roller He got hair down to his knee Got to be a joker He just do what he please Shoot me Shoot me Shoot me Shoot me He wear no shoe shine He got toe jam football He got monkey finger He shoot Coca-Cola He said, I know you You know me One thing I can tell you is You got to be free Come together Right now Over me Shoot me Shoot me Shoot me He back production He got walrus gumboot He got on no sideboard He want spinal cracker He got feet down below his knee Hold you in his arm Yeah, you can feel his disease Come together Right now Over me Shoot me Right! Come! Come! Come! Come! He roller coaster He got air he wanted He got muddy water He want mojo filter He said, one and one and one is three Got to be good looking Cause he's so hard to see Come together Right now Over me Shoot me Shoot me Shoot me Oh! Come together Yes Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together Come together PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ PYM JBZ of the need for housing. It's very, very important to all of us. And it is a little strange to see the house next door doing exactly what you're asking. At the same time, we do have to consider the idea of what the law says and how they got the permission to do that. As a matter of fact, I doubt if they did. It's probably there by accident, so to speak. But I think we will have to take that into consideration. But again, let me say, it's so important to do these kind of houses, and we really appreciate that. And I'll add, those are the pictures that were just kind of right close to us. Going further down the street, there are other properties that are similar to the duplex, where the drive just goes to the front without a garage. Age of those places, I don't know. The duplex is not original. I can't tell you how old it is. Same with the other houses. This street has a few original houses, but it also has some that have been rebuilt, like duplexes. Maybe single family, I believe. But there's more of them that do have the drive in the front, which I didn't get the pictures of. I just took right adjacent to us. Well, and you could see some of those when you looked at the overhead view that the gentleman showed before we got up here. You could see all down the street. You could see all those driveways that he even referenced in his talking points. We just felt like it would be safer to be off the street. I understand the whole concept of not having that parking is not backing out into traffic. That makes sense. But we feel like it would be safer not to have these on the street at the bus stop and be in conflict with people using the bus. Well, and the reality is, looking at this picture right here, this was taken probably what, middle of the day? Yes. Where you've got it. Mid-morning. Already on the street. Yeah, mid-morning. So at the end of the day, when there are more people at home, more people needing parking, those streets are going to be filled up anyway. Yeah. So it's better for everybody if we can get more cars off the street than parking more cars on it. Right. That's not your car, is it? That is not my car. It's mine. It's mine. I didn't intend to park it there to take the picture, but I did and I thought, well, that sort of shows the concept. Yes, it is mine. Well, here's where I am on this. I looked at this site. There is currently a curb cut for one driveway at this site, which tells me historically this property had one driveway. That is correct. The regulations have been updated recently, more or less. I can't recall when we could no longer park in a residential in the front yard like this. I'm not sure if it was with the last parking ZOTA, if it's been several years, but the Urban County Council and the Planning Commission have set a policy of we do not want driveways in our front yards. And sometimes the lot that you buy is not wide enough to build the house you want and still have the driveway. And so we have turned down, I think we turned down one on Loudoun maybe a couple years ago, very similar situation. I like kind of staying consistent, but I will say this. We are, as a board, have been much more willing to reduce side yards and other items to increase your building area and permit you to have a drive going into the back for rear parking. And so I will, if that is, so I will probably not support this today as presented. That's just kind of where I am. I don't see anything overly special about this lot that's not the same with three other lots on the street when they come and they say I want to park in my front yard too. And so given that, I will not be supporting this, but I do encourage you to look at alternatives and talk with staff and find a way to maybe get relief on your side yard requirements. Yes, sir. I don't know if I direct this at Mr. Belcher or the committee. What if we just used the one curb cut that's already there? Is that feasible and come back for the June meeting to get one parking spot with the existing curb cut, which is, I can't see it really there, but it's just in front of the car. You can almost see it there. But there is the existing curb cut, as you mentioned. For me, that's a more reasonable request than two curb cuts. But since the plan's not in front of me, I wouldn't say yes or no. I don't know what the staff's position would be. If for some reason this board wants to continue for a month, I'm okay with that, let you work something out. But if you come back with two driveways, I will vote it down next month. So typically, we would need to go back and have a staff meeting to review it. We wouldn't make a decision here at the meeting. So if you wanted to make revisions to the plan and you wanted to continue this for a month and come back and we can look at it, I can't guarantee the staff's recommendation would change, but we could look at it and see. I mean, what Mr. Gross said, the ordinance is pretty clear about not having parking in the front. So that is typically where staff is looking at what does the ordinance say. But if you want to make some revisions and come back, and certainly whether we recommend one way or another, the board seems like they've got a little bit more of an appetite for something like that. But I don't want to speak for them as a whole. Brandon, at least, is saying that. Okay. So. I have a question. No, I don't. Just a second. We've got a question. Is your one driveway going to give you what you need to develop this property? We don't know at this time because no, I mean, it's simple. I mean, it's better to have one than none. But one won't give us enough. Because again, while we don't know the people who will be living in this property, we do know the people who are living in every other one of our properties who have vehicles who have jobs who have places they need to get to. And while I do understand, we both understand exactly what the ordinance says. And but the reality of it is that part of the reason we're here is because there are exceptions made to those every day. And we're trying to get an exception made, not for us, not for me as an individual, but for someone who is in dire need of a helping hand. That's what we're asking you guys to do. Yeah. So would you convert from a duplex to a single family if you only had one driveway? No, no, we would just remove the driveway. Yeah, we just have one car. We we as the as the landlord would have to determine who gets use of the driveway. I don't see the relevance of coming back on that if that's not gonna personally, I don't know. Personally, I think at a certain point, we just have to cut our losses and cut the driveways off the street parking. The reality is we've talked about redesigning the property. We talked about all of that. But we're a we're a small nonprofit in town that's just getting ourselves started. We don't have the money to go back and redesign our property based on all of this. Reality is the most likely option that comes out of you declining this, which is well within your right to do is us chopping off those driveways and our tenants having to park on the street and run the risk. Yeah, understood. Thank you. Any other questions? No. Well, hang on. I have a question. So you are you so you're telling me that a continuous probably wouldn't work then? Because I'm fine with not having another hearing next month. It saves me a lot of time. I mean, but I will. That's what I make sure you guys either two driveways or no driveways is what you're telling me. That's our most likely if we if we had a good indication of talking to staff that we could get a talk to your partner, but he's telling me that that's the way we came in was basically if you disapprove that we were down to no parking spots. But I was just looking at a way to get something out of it. And Mr. Sturdivant, just because he brought up the one the one driveway is not allowable either. Bob, even just the one driveway would still require us to do a variance just because the curb cut was there doesn't mean that they can automatically put it back. I agree with that. That makes sense to me. I was wondering the same thing. So you're saying you would just assume not just because the curb allow the variance based upon it. So we are better off just to take it out of our site plan, resubmit to building inspection, because that was the only thing from building inspection we needed. So we'll just if it's not likely to happen, then we will just do that. Okay. All right. Well, if you want to close out public, I'll make a motion. Okay. I think at this time I'm ready for a motion. I move PLM BOA 2538 John Workman's request to reduce required front yard setback from five feet to zero feet to have two driveways in the front yard within the infill and redevelopment area in an R2 zone on property at 732 Florence Avenue be disapproved set as recommended by staff and the evidence set forth in the report and based upon the testimony today. Thank you. Thank you. And Miss Tucker has seconded. Anything further from the board? Okay, we will take a vote. Okay, the disapproval has been upheld. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Our next item is PLM BOA 25-44. That's Kara Mead. This item has also been recommended for disapproval. I'm sorry, applicant, you can hang on just a moment. You guys can go, but the staff will present first. Dalton Belcher on behalf of planning staff. So this is a request for a variance to reduce the required front yard setback for a corner lot from 40 feet to 27 feet nine inches to construct a swimming pool in the front yard in a single family residential R1B zone on property located at 616 Autumn Lane. You can see here on the screen highlighted in light blue and I'm magnifying it now. This is the subject property. And then I went ahead and got a little bit of a more zoomed in view so you can see it a little bit better. The pool is going to be located approximately in this area over here. You see there's a fence here currently, but it'll be back over in this way. Here's a street view of the property so you can see just a little bit of context. And then here is another view. Basically, the fence, so essentially pool is going to be approximately in this location. I will have a site plan here in a second. Here's the site plan. So as mentioned, the applicant is proposing they have the red line as the building lines as well as an easement over here. But this red line is the setback line and the pool is going to be, I don't know, about half, but a little under half of the pool would be past the setback line, which is why they're requesting the variance here. Staff recommends approval, excuse me, disapproval, noting that 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 justify the need for the variance. And staff notes that the lot is a typical corner lot similar to others in the vicinity. Staff also notes that disapproval of the variance would not deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their land or create an unnecessary hardship. The applicant could construct a smaller swimming pool or adjust the placement of the proposed swimming pool in order to not require variance and maintain the side street side yard. And that is it for staff's presentation. Do you have any questions for me? Yeah, Dalton, real quick. The report says the reduced required front yard setback for a corner lot. Are we dealing with the front yard or are we dealing with the side yard? Side street yard. So in the ordinance it says when you're on a corner lot, you basically have to use the front yard setback on the side street. So that's why it's there. But this is for, this would be functionally the way that the applicant uses the property and they can explain it a little bit more. So yeah, technically this is the side yard. This is their front yard here where the driveway is and this is the side street yard. That makes sense. I'm following you now. Thank you. Can you go back to the picture and show me where that fence is in relation to the site plan? Yeah. Vice versa or show on the site plan where the fence goes. Yeah, so you see the, here's the garage on the property and the fence is, you know, right in line with that. And then we'll go back to the site plan. So we have the garage is approximately right here and I'm not drawing a straight line, but that's where the fence So it's pulled out past where the fence is right now? Yeah. Yeah. And then there are building code requirements about when you have a pool, about having a fence and having proper screening. So they would have to address that as well as part of the pool application. That would be with building inspection. And if they were to install the pool behind the plane of the garage, that's permissible? Yes. It's because we are out however many feet? Approximately 13-ish feet, a little bit, you know. So if up is north, if they move 13 feet west, they're fine. Is that right? Yes. I mean, we've got to make sure that you may have to maneuver it a little bit, but in an approximate term, yes. Okay. Okay. All right. Any other questions for staff before we hear from the applicant? Did you all advise the applicant that moving that pool 13 feet to the north would allow them to be? So there's always a balance of an applicant sometimes wants to do, you know, they want to put it in a certain location and so, you know, they can control their application. We always say, you know, you've got to be X amount of feet back to meet the ordinance and then if they decide to go forward with the application, that's their decision. But they were aware that moving it north 13 feet would put them within the regulations? Yeah. I mean, that's, you know, we told them what you're doing would require a variance. So yes, they were aware. Thank you. Okay. All right. We'll give the applicant a chance to review their project. Hello, I'm Kara Meade. I'm the owner of 616 Autumn Lane. I have with me Joe Fields. He's my contractor and he can address more specific questions about the placement of the pool. Could you speak up a little bit, please? I sure can. Is that better? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So to address their disapproval, I think that the property is described as a typical corner lot, doesn't accurately reflect the actual usability of the space. The backyard is unable to be usable due to the grade and limited flat area, making it infeasible for pool construction. You saw that in the aerial imagery and on-site evaluation really gives you the lay of the land. The front and interior setbacks already push the structure toward one side, leaving the street side yard as the only realistically usable area for a lap pool. And so the proposed pool is for, indeed, swimming laps, thus reducing its size would eliminate its intended purpose. Again, I'll turn it over to Joe Fields and he can talk about other issues in the backyard, why we can't move it necessarily. Secondly, the established precedent in the immediate vicinity is something I wanted to talk about. Numerous properties use their side yards in ways inconsistent. It seems with the current interpretation of zoning limits. Specifically, I, just by visual view, Chenault Road, Clifton, and Strawberry Lane, all three have pools placed in the side yard very close to the street and clearly not conforming to a strict side back, side setback. And additionally, altogether, just a drive of the neighborhood, I have come up with 20 different corner lot properties on Turkeyfoot, Strawberry Lane, Turf Court, Lakewood, numerous ones on Lakewood, Indian Mound, Andover, Cooper, and Ridgeway. And all of these have fences, garages, or other structures on their side yard that does not confirm or align with what they're suggesting. So this denial would, indeed, create unreasonable hardship rather than the installation of just a pool. That's what I'm going for. I need a lap pool for swimming. And the unsafe grading that Joe will talk about to the existing structures would be a problem. So I'll turn it over to Joe and he can answer practical questions for you. My name is Joseph Fields. The way that the lot sits in the back, if she does the pool, we'll have to put retaining walls up. And I'm talking three or four foot, they'll have to be engineered, approved. And then the grade will have to be totally changed. As it goes towards Turkeyfoot, the slope of the land, if we could move it that 12 or 13 feet will keep us from having to do any retaining wall. If we put the pool on the lot plan where the lot number is, number 12, we can't put it there. We have a KU underground line that feeds the house. It could be moved, but according to our electrician, it's about a $13,000 to $14,000 job to remove the underground line and put it around the pool, has to stay five foot off the pool. KU only allows us two 90s, and he says it's going to take three or four 90s to reconfigure the electric. So I don't want to spend the money on that. The retaining wall is probably more than half of what the pool is going to cost. Not to mention the engineering. You know, we're going to create, she's going to spend $75,000 to $100,000 putting this pool in. It's only going to up her property value and bring more money back into the city. So there are reasons, and there are financial reasons, that we can't put the pool someplace else in the yards. If you go smaller pool, there's no way, you can't do a lap in a 20 foot pool. That's the size we were trying to keep the pool, to make it a decent swimmable size. She is an exercise and yoga instructor. This is part of her daily routine. I've done two, three houses for her. The last two, both houses, had the same size or sizable pools, and she used them every day, but that's part of her exercise routine. That's why we wanted to put the pool in. Do we have any other questions of the applicant? And I couldn't remember. Let me double check. Was there a public comment on this one? No. Okay. All right. Yes, Mr. Clark? Who else is using the pool? Would use the pool? Me. Just you? Okay. So, would your plan be to locate the pool where it's shown on the site plan, and then put a privacy fence? Back in front of it, and then screening in front of that. On the south side? Yeah. She's got a fence company and the landscapers. I mean, everybody's lined up and ready to go. We didn't know about this until they went to pull the permit for the pool. And staff, is she permitted to put a six-foot fence in the required side yard in this instance, as long as it's three feet back? Yes, it has to be three feet back. There is also considerations for site distance. If the neighbor has a driveway right there, they need to be able to back out, too. Also, the new fence would be actually in line with the neighbor's current fence. We're not taking it all the way to the sidewalk. It'll be back, even with the neighbor's fence. We did look at a site distance from the corner looking up at going out towards Taste Creek Road. Well, you can see all the way up through the intersection there, and if you look back the other way towards Acton Park, there's 500 foot of site that you can see the whole road. We're not going to impede the side yard or any of that for site distance. Just for clarification, the fence can go all the way out to where the pool is. The pool is just not permitted because it's treated like a building? Exactly. It's treated as a structure. Our main thing in trying to push it outward is the financial feasibility is going to cancel the pool if we don't. We can't afford to move the electric. We don't want to build a $35,000 retaining wall to hold the pool. You give us that 13 feet, the grade changes significantly. I would just say I think this may be one of those incidents where we can make an exception, and I would go in that direction depending on how we're thinking about it in terms of everyone's opinion, whether it be feasible or not, to have further discussion about that. I'd be agreeable to hear that as well. If the fence can go out that way, I was just thinking, I don't know what's behind the fence. It doesn't bother me to have something behind the fence that you don't see that's similar to a deck. I'm usually pretty lenient on the placement of decks, too, that stay completely behind as far as considering a variance for. Anyone else have anything to add, or we could take a brief recess if Mr. Clark would like to get with legal. If you do go that direction, the staff could put a condition that there has to be a solid six-foot fence to hide the pool. Yes, no, maybe? I believe it's the law. You have to fence the pool. I'm not sure it has to be a six-foot fence, so if that's what you all would like to see. That's what I would do anyway. Okay. Okay. Anything further? We'll take a brief recess. Okay, we'll take maybe seven minutes. Okay, thank you all. Thank you. We will call back to order. If the applicant can please come back forward. Good afternoon, I think we're ready for a motion. Madam Chair, with respect to PLNBOA 2544, Karamid's request for a variance for the required side street, side yard setback, I move for approval based on the same findings. Number one, granting the variance should not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare of land in the general vicinity, nor cause a hazard to the public. The proposed pool will be adequately screened with a privacy fence. Number two, granting the variance will not result in construction that is out of conformity with the general vicinity. Testimony at the hearing reveals several neighboring properties with structure built in the side street, side yard. The privacy fence will also screen neighboring properties from the use of the pool. Number three, there are specific circumstances on the subject property that do not generally apply to land in the general vicinity that justify the need for this variance, in which show why this request does not attempt to circumvent the provisions of the zoning ordinance. The grading in the backyard chart changes significantly and will require installation of a three to four foot high retaining wall to locate a pool in the backyard. Further, an underground electrical line would have to be relocated before the pool could be built in the backyard. Disapproval of a variance could create an unnecessary hardship because the applicant cannot build this pool in the backyard, and a reduction in the size of the pool eliminates the ability to use the pool for desired purposes. This approval is made subject to the following conditions. Number one, construction shall be in accordance with the submitted application materials and site plans. Number two, all necessary permits and approvals shall be obtained from the division of building inspection prior to construction. So moved. Thank you. Mr. Sturtevant has seconded the motion. Any further discussion from the board? We will take a vote. Motion is passed. Good luck with your project. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next item is PLN BOA 25-49, the Roman Catholic Bishop Diocese of Lexington. If the applicant can come forward please. Good afternoon. Please state your name for the record. Rory Cayley with EA Partners on behalf of the applicant and the audience with me is Rob Rumke, President of Lexington Catholic. If you have any questions as to the use of the grotto. Okay. Great. I think we had a couple of audience members to speak on this item, correct? Yes. We have at least one. So would you like to tell us a little bit about the project first? Sure. Lexington Catholic itself is a conditional use in the neighborhood. So any additions, changes there have to come to you for permission. And this will be an area of a couple of parking spaces being removed for a grotto, which is essentially a covered meditation prayer area. And that's all that it is. You have site plans there. It's very small. New landscaping with it. Okay. It seemed pretty simple. Do we have any questions of the applicant? Approximately how many persons would be, would fit into this area, would be used? Under the coverage itself, it would be a handful of people. It's next to a parking lot, I suppose, if someone was to, you know, you could probably have a small gathering there for prayers. Is this during the day while school is in session? Is that the idea? Or is it after school? Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. If you have a seat, we'll have public comment at this time. Sir, right there. Thank you to the board for allowing me to speak. I'm Rodney Wesley. I own the property that butts up to this proposed project at 570 Stratford Drive. And I received this notice from the Planning and Zoning Commission. And I do want to say that while I support the applicant to build a monument for the Glorify Our Lord and Savior, I unfortunately do not support where it's been located on the 13.6 acre complex that they currently have. The plat that I received showed a sketch of the monument being 12 1⁄2 feet tall. So what this does not show is that my backyard sits approximately 5 to 6 feet below grade of the parking lot asphalt. So therefore, we now have a monument that is, to give you perspective, almost as tall as this ceiling. So we're looking at approximately 20 feet tall. So it also is pushed up against the back of my property line. There's some unanswered questions. We have a few trees that are separating us at the property line. And generally, you're doing construction. A lot of that vegetation is torn down to make way for a construction project. So the unanswered questions would be, is the applicant going to create a tasteful privacy hedge or will we just be able to enjoy the backside of this monument at our backyard? Next question would be, let's say sometime in the future I decide to sell this property. Do you think this monument is going to enhance the marketability of my property or is it going to detract from? And while we can debate the merits on whether or not it would detract, I think we would all agree it will not enhance. So what economic penalty will I suffer having a 20 foot tall structure in my backyard? I would assume there's probably economic value of which I have not been compensated. So I am asking the board, humbly, to either deny the request for the location or please amend the request, putting requirements on the applicant for either a privacy hedge or something where there's not a disturbance to the neighborhood. Any questions? I appreciate you will allow me to speak. Thank you so much. Okay. Thank you. Do we have anyone else here to speak? No? Okay. If the applicant can return to the podium. And are you able to address any of the questions? Well. Particularly about screening and the vegetation that's there. Okay. So the property in question- And I'm sorry, sir. Please state your name for the record. I'm sorry. I'm Rob Rumke. I'm the president of Lexington Catholic High School. Pleasure to be here today. The property or the home behind us there, there is currently vegetation and trees that sort of separate Lexington Catholic from his yard and otherwise. Some of it's wild growth. Some of it's nice established trees. I'm not exactly sure which house is his. I called my architect and he said that the house in question is not right behind where we're building this either. It's a little bit offset near our regular parking lot. So this is at the north end of the football stadium. And I'm open to leaving the current vegetation there. The actual building itself, if you will, is just the grotto or a shrine to Mary is not a whole lot taller than above that exit sign. Those yards behind there do set down. He's right about that. So it would be higher. We right now have two trees that are in the design on either side. We've made sure those aren't anywhere near the KU wires and things like that. But we're open to either leaving the current vegetation there, not cutting it down so that the back view is the way it is now. We could leave it exactly the way it is now. Okay. Do we have other questions of the applicant? I have a question of the homeowner. What is based on our site plan here? What is your lot number back there? No. What's your address? 570. 570 is his address. We've got him here. 570. Okay. Thank you. And what is what is the distance? Whoever wants to answer this. The distance from the back of the proposed structure to the property line. Give me a ballpark on that. Let's see. While you're looking that up, is there adequate space back there to put some trees or plantings back there to screen out the structure? Well, let's start with the answer. Yeah. If you look at what they just pulled up there, yes, there's a utility easement behind there. So the back of the grotto is not as close to the property line as the current parking spaces are. So I'm going to say it's somewhere around 8 to 10 feet from the property line. The aerial here... Oh. Oh. Okay. Never mind. So you can see the field, the bleachers, and then the row of asphalt. And at the top of this row of asphalt, it's right there. That is I believe it's some of the baseball equipment. That location is where the grotto will be going in. You can see the existing vegetation that's there. There are utilities back there, but that's the existing vegetation that they agreed to leave in place. Is there a utility easement back there? Yeah. I don't know that I... Yeah. And we've talked to KU. There's actually a utility pole and service right there at the corner where those last cars are parked there that we would tie into for power. You know, they normally trim those areas anyway to keep the trees out of the power lines. So I don't know what that height is, but it's usually... They usually trim them off or what? 15 feet or so in height. Yeah. The grotto is set up to be at the edge of the easement, not into it, but in front of it. Okay. Thank you. Were there any other questions of the applicant? If not, I will entertain a motion, and if anyone wants to amend with the condition to keep the existing vegetation, they could do that as well. A motion? I'd make a motion to approve PLN BOA 25-49, Roman Catholic Bishop Diocese of Lexington requests a conditional use permit to amend an existing conditional use for a school for academic instruction, to construct an accessory structure, and modify an existing parking lot in a single-family residential zone located on property at 2250 Clays Mill Road, based on the recommendation of staff and approval of the three conditions stated, and also on a testimony we received today. Thank you. Was there a Mr. Persily a second? Further discussion? If not, we will take a vote. Motion is passed. Good luck with the project. Thank you. Okay. We are now into our short-term rentals. So at this time, we will first have staff do the overall presentation regarding our short-term rental regulations or guidance, and then we will move into our cases. James Mills, Planning Staff. So I want to present to you the short-term rental applications and regulations for this month. So on December 5, 2024, the Urban County Council approved updates to the Code of Ordinances and the Zoning Ordinance regarding the regulations of short-term rentals in Fayette County. Effective 12-12-2024, all new short-term rental applications are reviewed through these regulations. Right now, any short-term rentals with an occupancy greater than 10 require a conditional use permit. Section 13 of the Code of Ordinances includes additional regulations for short-term rentals related to business licensing and permitting, and the Zoning Ordinance in Article 3-13 states that short-term rentals shall not be utilized for private events such as weddings, parties, or in which the number of participants exceeds the maximum occupancy limit. Article 1-11 defines a short-term rental as the commercial use of a dwelling unit that is rented in whole or in part for temporary occupancy by transient guests for a tenancy of less than 30 days. Article 1-11 also defines the difference between an unhosted short-term rental as during the rental period where a primary residence does not occupy the property and a hosted short-term rental which we do not, which is when a primary residence resides on the property during the rental period. Maximum occupancy limits were updated to two per bedroom plus an additional two individuals or a total of 10, and a limit was set on the number of short-term rental applications per month. As you all remember, we were having several past 10, so now we are now at 10, and there are several regulations regarding short-term rentals that the board shall take into consideration, including the compliance record, whether other STRs in the general facility have been cited as a nuisance, whether the property being considered is located within a neighborhood that may be vulnerable to involuntary displacement, which goes to our task force on neighborhoods and transition report, which none of the applications that you will be hearing from today fall within any of these top 10 census block groups. The new requirements are that short-term rentals regulated as a conditional use shall not be located within 600 feet of another short-term rental regulated as a conditional use. Now, these are for our urban zones, and the number of unhosted short-term rentals shall not exceed 2% of all dwelling units within 1,000 feet in residential zones. There is relief for this, however, the relief provisions aren't relevant to what we're going to discuss today, but I will highlight that it is based on the adjacency to non-residential zones that allow short-term rentals as a principle or accessory use. Whether there's a significant environmental feature or minor arterial or higher classification roadway that separates the proposed short-term rental from an existing unhosted short-term rental within the buffer area, and an unhosted short-term rental within the buffer area is located on the perimeter of the buffer area. Now, we also have regulations in regards to agricultural zoned STRs, and these are both applied to hosted and unhosted short-term rentals for occupancies up to 10 or greater, and conditional uses for maximum size of 10 acres in the AR zone. There are several requirements for agricultural zoned STRs, including health departments saying that the septic tank on the property is sufficient to handle the proposed use, find that the proposed STR will not have an adverse influence on the uses occurring on the subject property or adjoining or adjacent properties, find that adequate fire safety measures are present within the unit, and that adequate parking is available on site, and one of the main ones is that spacing of one mile between all short-term rentals both hosted and unhosted in AR, AB, and AN zones measured from the property boundary. Permitted detached accessory dwelling units and farm employee dwelling units may be used as a short-term rental, and currently there are no relief provisions for agriculturally zoned STRs. Here's all the issued zoning compliance slash license, so this is actually all licensed short-term rentals in Fayette County. So here's our concentration numbers from this month. Thanks. Real quick, and just for the audience, that does not mean that's every short-term rental. Some of them may be illegal. These are the ones that are properly licensed. These are all properly licensed. So these are both all properly gone through getting a zoning compliance permit from the Division of Planning, getting a conditional use permit, and have received a license from the Division of Revenue. So these are all that are officially licensed. What's the current number? What's the current number on those? If I recall correctly, because I didn't pull the numbers recently, it is around 950, I think, if I recall correctly. But don't take that as exactly 950. I could be off on that. I don't. I apologize. The concentration of STRs in the proximity to the subject property for the properties this month, we had none that had any within the 600-foot buffer, and we only had one property with one STR within 1,000 feet, which had a concentration percentage below 2% at 0.4%. And for our ag STRs in proximity to subject property, we had neither of them had one within a mile, and with that, I don't, I think, any questions. Okay. Thank you. So our first item is PLN BOA 25-43, Angel Investments, LLC. The applicant can please come forward. Thank you. Please state your name for the record. My name's Chloe Long. Thank you. So this has been recommended for approval, and there are four conditions that have been listed. Have you had an opportunity to review those conditions? Yes. We were going to ask after today what the next step is. We have the application and the check that needs to go to revenue, but then we were going to see what else needs to happen. Okay. Well, first, we have to approve it. And then I think we can help you with the, staff can help with next steps afterwards. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And I think you have some neighbors or maybe people to speak regarding this item. How many do we have? So is there anything you'd like to tell about the project or your plans for it first? So we, he and I actually talked privately. I am, I service the short-term rental. I'm not the owner. He's out of country. But he and I have talked about some of his concerns privately, and I think that's something that we were able to work out. Okay. But other than that, I service short-term rentals all over Lexington, and they've been, I haven't seen anything too crazy. So I think this will be good for Tim, especially in the area, considering that the house, you know, is a single-family house, you're not having to share parking and stuff like that. So I think this will go well. Okay. Are there any questions of the applicant? I have a concern. I don't think I can support this, and the reason why is because when I went by, like your grass is like a foot and a half tall. It was coming up over the conditional use permit sign, and that's a code violation. Gotcha. And the yard, it kind of needs some love. Yeah. So like I mentioned, the owner is out of country, but he does have a neighbor who we were just talking about actually, too, about he actually does landscaping. So we're going to try to come up with a plan with the neighbor to keep up with that maintenance. Yeah. Because all the rest of the yards in that circle are mowed. I was made aware of that today by Michael. So thank you. Okay. Any other questions of the applicant? Chair, I just want to note one thing. Coming from the presentation that James just did, our most recent data from revenue has 726 licenses, so maybe not as many as the 950. I just want that to be clarified. Okay. Thank you. Let the record reflect 726 licenses currently. As of April 23rd. So that number can fluctuate. As of April 23rd. Okay. Thank you. All right. You still wish to speak? Sure. Okay. We'll give him a chance. For just a moment. We'll give him an opportunity. And do we only have one speaker? I think so. Is there? I'm the only neighbor who made it. My name is Michael Rogers, and I reside at 3705 Lady Dylane. And when I first saw this, so I don't know Tim very well at all. He's lived next door or two doors down from me for quite a few years. I just learned he moved to Thailand, and I was concerned about him having an unhosted Airbnb because I'm also a landlord, but I don't do the Airbnbs. I've heard horror stories about them in general, what they do to potential neighborhoods. So I was concerned, and so I didn't know Tim, and the grass is extremely high. I took a picture of it too before I came down here. It needs to be cut, and his neighbor, my neighbor, I'm in between us, is another gentleman, and he was going to cut the grass. Anyway, he needs to get landscaping taken care of, and if I can also work with Tim remotely to keep an eye on the property, and especially if more than six people. It's a three bedroom, two bath house, all of them are. I mean, if it gets out of hand, what recourse do I have to cancel his project, would be a question I would have. I'm assuming it'll work out fine, I'd like it to, but if it gets out of hand, he's having wild parties and everything. Staff can give you, there is a hotline to call to report. Yeah, so if there are issues, enforcement issues, there's a process that you can call the hotline and file complaints, and then that would go through an enforcement process at that point. Okay, and I will note that in the past, Tim has kept the yard in good shape. Since he's out of town, landscaping tends to happen that way, but I'm talking, in fact, I've been messaging him remotely in Thailand right now, for the first time, it's the first time I've talked to him. So I was able to give my number, and so I think he's willing to work and say, hey, help me make this happen. And so I don't want to be one of those neighbors who just says no, but I'm also concerned about the neighborhood, so I don't want to get out of hand. If I get that number, that'll help out a lot, and that's all I have to say. Thank you. Just as a reminder in the rules, the occupants are allowed to be there, but they're not allowed to have parties where people that are not staying come to the residence. So that is not permitted, and if that were to occur, that's another reason you'd call the hotline. And that's what Corey was telling me as well, that he's going to put some stipulations, like a minimum of three night stay. So you don't have those one night rentals where it's just to rent and have a crazy party, which none of us want, so. And which are not allowable by the ordinance. Right, right, so knowing some of this, I'm here, so I thought that I'd come up and just say my concerns if I can get that number, I really don't have any opposition. Thank you, we appreciate it. Okay, and did you want to say something on this particular case? Okay, cool. Thank you, sir. Hi, my name is Janie Griggs. I live at 3720 Lady Dahl Lane, which is directly across the street from this property. I don't think that people understand that this is a little cul-de-sac area. These are garden homes that there's no place to park. You have your driveway, and then there is one spot in front of your house that could allow for one car to park. We have a very nice neighborhood. It's a small neighborhood. There's only four streets in our neighborhood. I would guess to say that probably about 40% of the properties there are rental properties. We're fortunate enough in our little area that it's all the homeowners, and we take great care with our property and everything. I didn't know what the agenda was and how to present myself or anything, so I didn't really come prepared. I do have a picture of Tim's house right now. I took it right before I came. And the grass is up to your knees. It's very unkept property. Tim is a great guy, but as he said, he's moved to Thailand. So he is not readily available to check on his property. And judging by the way it's been taken care of since he's been gone, he's been gone about six weeks or something. And judging by the way the property has been taken care of, it just gives me great concern as to how it's going to be supervised with these Airbnb rentals. So that's my main concern right now, is that. And plus, I don't want to interrupt the ambiance of our nice little cul-de-sac that we live in. And also, there's a lot of children that play in the street there. And the people that live there are aware to watch out and drive slow and all of that. But somebody that isn't familiar with the neighborhood, I'm afraid that there might be a safety concern there with the kids. But I think that I'm speaking for a lot of the people in the neighborhood that if it's supervised okay, and we don't have room for a bunch of cars. So if he's allowing two cars in the garage and two cars in the driveway, then that would keep the cars off the street. But I don't know what the stipulations are with the rental property there as to the parking, which is probably the biggest concern. And also partying. But I think that you all have created a tighter structure for that to prevent it. But I think that that's pretty much what my concerns are. Thank you. We appreciate it. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. Was there anyone else? I didn't mean to miss anyone. Okay. Next. Go on. Like I mentioned before, I wasn't aware of the yard. But I think with having the neighbors that are there to help keep an eye out. And then his direct neighbor, Zach, they're going to work on a plan to do that maintenance regularly. And once guests start getting in there more, I will personally be there cleaning and keeping an eye on what's going on. So it's something that we'll have eyes on it a lot more. And Tim has not moved to Thailand. This is still his personal home. He is just exploring for a little bit and he will be returning. That is why he was not interested in long term rentals because he would like to be able to come back to his home freely whenever that is. And as far as parking goes, I don't think parking will be too big of an issue. I think the driveway will be able to be utilized and with only six guests. Hopefully, they're doubling up and riding together. I don't think it'll be an issue as long as it's kept in the garage, in the driveway. And I think those were the concerns. But yeah, there will be a lot more eyes on the property here on out, assuming approval does go forward. And like talking with Michael, we're going to get together with the neighborhood so they can communicate and they can give him their concerns. And let it be like a group effort instead of it just being Tim being alone and making his own decisions. Thank you. I'd like to just mention, I'm concerned about the fact that the property is not taken care of at this point. And that's the point that we have to make a decision. So would you tell me who is responsible for taking care of this property, both inside and outside? because I think that's very important. Yeah, so that is the owner, Tim Mars. I would be the one acting as someone to service it as a short term rental. I clean short term rentals and I help manage short term rentals in Lexington, which is where I come into the play. But after that, that's not really anything I would be handling. If it doesn't get approved, I wouldn't be there. I guess my question is simple. Who is in charge? Timothy Mars. And who is he? He is the owner of the home. He's the owner and he's in Thailand? Yes. Well, that doesn't help us. I mean, who's in charge now, right now? And he's going to be watching that property daily. I guess that would be his brother. I can give you- His brother? Yeah. Is that part of the agreement? So, I was notarized on the application as the one, I guess, coming here to present and just keeping in, I guess, maybe I would be in charge. I'm not sure. But I think we can get the lawn taken care of as soon as possible. Well, and I think, I'll just add to that. I appreciate the concern, but the vacant sitting property is the issue. And once they get on the rolling as a STR, it definitely can't be allowed to be that way. It won't rent. So it's just sitting vacant and unutilized right now. So this will be a utilization of it that would actually require it to be maintained. I guess that's my concern. I'm not sure that that's necessarily the case. If we're not taking care of it now, are we going to be taking care of it later? So anyway, I've expressed my concern. Yeah, totally makes sense. Very important. Yeah, and I have let Tim know, and that is something that's going to get taken care of as soon as possible. So that it can be rented out, and so that it can be. nice place for people to go. Because I wouldn't want to represent that if it wasn't you know a nice clean place for someone to go. So that'll be something that'll be taken care of as soon as we get out of here. Thank you. Do we have other questions of the applicant? Okay. I will entertain a motion. Well before I make a motion I guess just asking staff. Did you hear anything today that would cause you to change your recommendation Dalton or James? I guess it's important that the property remain in compliance with all the city regulations. So if you're not the responsible person for that Tim needs to hire someone to be responsible for the exterior of the property. So that he doesn't have code violations. Because that can also lead to it being revoked. Gotcha. Okay. So I think it's important that we everybody understands how important it is to maintain the property. And as the the chair mentioned obviously it's not going to rent very well. Yeah. If the property is not being maintained. But that is a I think a concern for the board and the city. That the property is being maintained and meeting all of the city requirements. Just generally. Thank you Ms. Wade. With that I'm comfortable moving forward. So let's. Okay it looks that way. PLM BOA 2543 Angel Investments LLC's. I move for approval of the request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in the R3 zone on property at 3713 Lady Dyed Lane. Based upon the staff's report recommending approval. The testimony given here today and subject to the four conditions set forth in it. Thank you. Do we have a second? Thank you Mr. Pursley. Any other discussion? If not we'll take a vote. Okay the motion has passed. Thank you. Okay the next item is PLM BOA 25-45 Embry Property Management LLC. Applicants please come forward. This one has been recommended for approval. And there are four conditions that have been listed. Have you had the opportunity to review those conditions? Yes I have. And are we comfortable with those? Yes. Okay. Do we have anyone here to speak on this particular item? We do. Okay. We do have some some folks. So do you want to tell us a little bit about your project first? Sure. It's been a long-term rental for the past couple years. And we did have a renter in there that wasn't complying with with what we asked them to do. So we did ask them to move out. And it's been a little transition over the past month. So the yard did get tall and we did receive a notice. But that's being taken care of tomorrow. And moving forward there's going to be improvements on the property. So we hope that it will be a nice addition to the neighborhood. Okay. Thank you. Do we have questions of the applicant? All right. If you could take a moment and we'll have public comment. I'd like to come forward. My name is my name is Wayne Stevenson. I live I own and live on the north side of the property at 537 South Ridge Drive. And I've been there since 2003. As the ladies mentioned the yard is about that high right now. It hasn't been cut since the prior tenants moved out several weeks ago. The tenants that moved out several weeks ago did little of anything to take care of the property as did the prior two tenants that are in there before. They were transitional roofers. And they would come in it they would leave the house at 6 in the morning come back in at dark and work all day out of town roofing. And they would bring in their extra materials and stack it in the back of the yard on pallets. There are several I would say eight to ten bundles of full bundles of shingles stacked up in the back of the yard that have been left behind. There are eight to ten decent-sized children's toys in the backyard that have been left behind. There's at least one bicycle and I think one tricycle back there. And generally the backyard and several things in the house I know of for sure are in disrepair. I trust that the ladies are going to have that taken care of. If I may I'd like this put up on the overhead if you would please. It's a drawing that was sent out with the letter from the city of the overhead of the property. And if you would look at the red line showing the backyard and it says chain-link fence. The south side of the property is chain-link as it is a gate on the west side of the property. The back of the property is not is not chain-link it's a mixed brand of fence. And the north side of the property is not fence at all except for alongside of my garage which is the last I believe 14 feet which is actually a wooden plank fence as is the west side of the property up to the house. It's a six foot plank fence just wood. At the if you pass my garage going to the back corner of the house on that north side it's just bushes. It was the two by four old wire fence that's two inches wide and four inches high cut wire that was welded together. But the prior roofers asked if I wanted the bushes trimmed down and I said yes if you would please. And they not only trimmed it down they took it all out to the ground level. Rolled up this fencing that was in there and took it all out. So now there's no fencing in there at all and I don't know if the ladies are aware of that but there was no fence on that side of the yard at all past the plank fencing. So there's no chain-link on that whole side of the yard and what's listed as chain-link all the way around is not there. It's only on the west side of the fence or west side of the house on the driveway side. It's a double-sided gate and then up the north excuse me up the south side. I'm out of time sorry. Yeah it's up the south side and across the back and I'm not sure if the back of it is the neighboring fence or if it's a fence to that yard. Okay. I've lived there since 2003 and that a lot of that drawing there is not at all what it's representing to be. Thank you sir. I just want to make you aware of that. Thank you we appreciate that. I'm Fran Hardaway and I live at 528 South Ridge which is directly across the street from the house in question. Ever since this house was sold 34 years ago it has been used as rental property and it has been abused and not cared for and there have been many times that I would love to have called somebody to complain about the goings-on over there but I didn't have anybody's name to call and I had no idea who to call other than the police and I really didn't want to call them because it wasn't necessarily their issue and it wasn't horrible so I don't I have real serious reservations about having a rental house short-term rental across the street from me because I've heard stories I have friends who have cleaned those houses after people leave and I have had several things happened around me where I just am not I feel very unsafe with all these people that are going to be coming in. My neighborhood is a huge majority of retirees it's very quiet there's people mind their own business and they don't make a lot of noise and we all you know those of us who live there appreciate it and I'm just I fear for my safety I have a big dog so I have somebody that protects me but I do fear for my safety with people on an ongoing basis that I don't have a clue who they are. Thank you. Thank you we appreciate that. Was there anyone else? Yes please. Hi my name is Sharon Gill I own the house at 545 South Ridge although I don't reside there it is occupied by my son and two grandchildren he's a single father raising these two boys by himself. I've not had much contact with these short-term rentals and never really gave it much thought until a year or so ago there was a tremendous issue on Windermere Road I don't know if any of you are familiar with that neighborhood but it's a one block street in a very high-end part of town the houses I think will go upwards of you know nine hundred thousand dollars there was shooting there was bullets flying in all directions I don't know that anyone was actually mortally wounded but the damage that was done not just to property but psychologically to the neighbors was pretty severe I think. I don't like the idea of people that we don't know and they're not going to be around long enough to get to know to be in a place where this kind of thing could happen if it can happen on Windermere it can happen on South Ridge I just don't think they're safe I don't know what do you do other than call the police do you wait till you hear gunfire how do you how are these people policed say just by the people who own or are running the running the property it's a it's a difficult decision to make but do any of you have them in your neighborhood would you feel comfortable in these kinds of situations I don't my son doesn't he's not here with me today simply because his name is not on the deed to the property that's the only reason thank you for listening. Thank you was there anyone else all right the applicant come forward again if you'd like to address any of the concerns I mean we would definitely like to apologize about the yard with our previous renter we we tried to work with them because they were a low-income family and we did let it go on for too long but now that they're gone and the roofers are gone the yard is being cleaned up today actually the mowers are coming tomorrow and I feel I feel better about having short-term rentals in there than the long-term ones honestly I feel like it's a small home it's only two bedrooms so it's not going to attract large crowds of people it's just going to be you know maybe two or three people coming to enjoy the tourism in Lexington and seeing what our city has to offer so I'd also be happy to give our contact information out to the neighbors that are concerned because we have an office just a few miles down the road and employees that can come really quickly so I think they'd appreciate that any other questions of the applicant yes I have a question could you please address the gentleman's comments about these chain-link fence I honestly didn't notice that side of the fence because it was kind of grown up like just the side but I just thought that the whole thing was chain-link fence that's just my mistake in the drawing so if it's an issue if we want to close the gaps on the fence we'd be happy to do that yeah part of my concern is that I guess you not knowing what's going on on the property and I did go by there and you would be in violation of your grass and some of the unkept things on the property so some of that it I don't know maybe I've misunderstood but it seemed like you didn't know about it and that kind of concerns me well the previous renter was taking his time moving to another property we allowed him that time and so I assumed that he was maintaining the yard while he was in the transition because he did start moving about a month ago but it took him a couple of weeks to do it so like I said it was just last the past few days that I realized how bad the yard was but I have arranged for a lawn care service to take care of it from now on since there's not gonna be a long-term renter in there anymore thank you so your renter was responsible for mowing the grass and those kinds of things yes he was yeah I guess my it'd be fair for me to ask that since I did the previous applicant who is actually in charge and who would be responsible for taking care I'm the property owner and manager so I would be in charge but we have employees also to to help take care of it okay very good thank you thank you anything further for the applicant not I'm open to a motion I'm chair move to approve PLN BOA 25-45 Emory property management LLC request for conditional use permit for unhosted short-term rental in a single-family residential zone on property located at five three three south of South Ridge Drive based on the staff's recommendation and subject to the four conditions as listed thank you do I have a second Oh mr. Walker has already second we are open for vote the motion is passed with your project and if you can please you know exchange numbers that would be great as well and then we're just gonna take a brief of five minute recess we're having some technical difficulties up here and then we'll be right back and rush through the last couple okay we will move right through our last one two three items the next one is PLN BOA 25-46 that's compound property LLC the applicant present please come forward this has been recommended for approval and there are four conditions that have been listed have you had the opportunity to review those yes and are we comfortable with the condition yes we are okay and we do have someone here to speak on behalf okay or an opposition great so you might want to tell us a little bit about your project first yeah so the property located at 1770 Yorktown Road is what we are requesting to be a short-term rental we've put a lot of work into this project we actually bought it a little over a year ago have renovated it and I've really gotten it to look really fantastic in this neighborhood and are just now excited for people to be able to come and stay in a great property here in Lexington I know the mayor right now is is big on getting people to visit and getting people to come because we're celebrating 250 years and I want people to be able to come and stay at that property and realize that Lexington could be a great place to stay long term to maybe move here to really enjoy our tourism and enjoy everything that Lexington has to offer I went to school here and decided to stay here in Lexington and have loved it since then I live in the neighborhood so it's really easy for me to go by and just take a look make sure things still look great currently I think things look great landscaping looks great it's been mowed and really it's it's just a great place for somebody to be able to come and stay and experience all that Lexington has to offer thank you do we have any questions of the applicant if you take a seat we'll have a moment for public comment you want to get three minutes each and whoever would like to come up first good afternoon council my name is Samuel Perry I am the next-door neighbor to the 1770 property I'm at 1766 I just bought the house back in August of this last year and just had some comments to bring up to you all today I am respectfully in opposition to this conditional use permit for the shirt short-term rental at this location for a couple of reasons number one the parking reality versus the claim on the application the applicant claimed to support five vehicles in their driveway specifically four in the driveway and then one in the garage I think realistically this is not possible as far as I am aware any short-term rental property anytime there is a garage that that will be used for property management tools rather than a parking space that is just my personal experience that being said the driveway itself is the exact same length as my own driveway I can very uncomfortably fit three cars in that driveway they are bumper-to-bumper and impeding in into the sidewalk if I am not careful number two as far as noise and disruption goes I know that many people here today have expressed their distaste for STRs specifically because of the noise and disruption risks I know that how disruptive that these transient properties can be I've lived in apartment complexes and on streets that are close to short-term rentals consistently they have been a problem in the neighborhood this consistent noise and safety risk to my home is a concern given how close it is in proximity as far as the neighborhood character goes our street is about 70 to 80 percent owner occupied it's a stable quiet environment some neighbors have lived here for decades and I just met a couple yesterday who has been on this street for over 60 years they've helped shape this community and they deserve to see it preserved an unhosted short-term rental is not consistent with the character or intent of this residential neighborhood number four there are already four short short-term rental properties that I am aware of in our neighborhood if each CUP is approved in isolation the broader transformation of our community gets ignored we risk becoming a revolving door area for vacationers rather than a true neighborhood number five and my last point this property is located near a public park which is a valued public space for area residents while one rental alone may not pose a problem an increase in short-term rentals can change how these shared spaces are used leading to more transient traffic reduce neighborhood familiarity around parks sidewalks and other communal areas it's also worth noting that converting this home into a short-term rental rather than a long-term rental let's say takes a much-needed single-family home off of the market housing in Lexington as I'm sure all of you already know is difficult to find and afford for many people and this move would only worsen the ongoing housing shortage so I am asking you to protect the residential integrity of our street and deny the CUP I've gathered 22 signatures over the last couple of days in opposition to this thank you I've got a question for you you mentioned four short-term rentals yes sir are what what is the proximity of those short-term rentals to the bear at STR sure they're at the front of the neighborhood they are more than a thousand feet the only remaining one that I know of is within a thousand feet feet that we were mentioned earlier in those slides thank you if you'd like to turn your signatures in so we can have my record that'd be great absolutely thank you all very much thank you please good afternoon my name is Jay Morgan Schaffo and I live across the street at 1773 Yorktown Road I own the home I've been there since 2021 and I am really passionate about our neighborhood we we tend to talk to each other we know each other I'm a single woman I own my own home and I live alone and it's really important to me that I know my neighbors we we support each other when things like the tornado came through very close to our neighborhood we were worried about that I had several people reach out to me making sure that I was okay I often work shifts that are late at night for work and I come home late at night it's important to me that if I see someone out I probably know who they are that's very important to me I think you know obviously noise complaints trash where it shouldn't be the parking issue I support those as well and I have signed as the paper supporting all of that Sam has said but to me it is mostly about the safety of our community and having people here that are responsible to our community people who come into these short-term rentals don't have any recourse if they do something bad in the in the neighborhood or are not respectful to the neighbors that are here so I am in opposition thank you very much thank you we had one else hi I'm Virginia McKee I live at 1738 York Town Road with my husband we're in opposition to this short-term rental for basically all the reasons that everybody already said but I want to especially stress because the owner said that he wanted to bring people into Lexington who might live here in the future but there's like no shortage of people who want to live in our neighborhood or in Lexington in general like it's a great neighborhood like a family could buy that house and live there and I think that's what should be done instead of a thank you I think we have one more place good afternoon I am Patricia Hall I live at 1758 Normandy Road I am on the street next to this property and of course our neighborhood is the wonderful garden side neighborhood we are close-knit we've got people living in our neighborhood my next-door neighbor was an original resident there this is not a place of partying and and all the goings-on like that this is a place of single-family dwellings particularly starter homes the home that I own was my first home purchase so with regards to the short-term rentals I don't see that it's helping housing situation in Lexington I am very concerned about that I also am in the situation of being concerned about you know responsibility because what I see with these short-term things considering the noise the trash the all of the things that have been mentioned on all of these it's a mix of capitalism and socialism the capitalism part comes from somebody getting a big check but the socialism part is dumped off on all the neighborhood because we're the ones that get the trash they get the noise they get the complaints that have the parking problems that all of this happens I respectfully request that you deny this thank you thank you I have any other people want to speak okay we can give the applicant an opportunity if you'd like to respond or rebut just make sure you're talking to us yeah so just one thing with driveway it is a good-sized driveway we are only requesting for it to be maximum occupied by six people I do not see that needing to be you know lots and lots of cars you know we do see with short-term rentals and stuff that people do double up and things like that so there is the ability for parking to be there just addressing some of the other things I live in the neighborhood I can get to the house in two minutes by car if there is an issue or something like that and I'm more than happy through the management process to address any issues or concerns or any things that come up during that we do definitely do not want this to you know turn into a big party thing or anything like that that's why we have just requested for to be six occupants and just going with it's talked about starter homes and things like that we did have this on the market and we have tried to sell this property and it has not and so that's why we decided to begin this year to just move into a short-term rental opportunity with that thank you we have questions of the applicant so you you you yourself personally are going to be the property manager correct yes sir thank you nothing further I'll entertain a motion I'll make a motion on this one before I do I just want to tell the audience I understand your concerns as I'm I live very close to your neighborhood I live in the Lafayette right next to Lafayette High School and so I get it but a lot of the issues you raised today are policy issues that are outside of this boards purview affordable housing you know whether the community and those type of issues the City Council is the one that makes these rules and we just and we just go by what the rules are they're not exactly what we would want them to be but in the day council has made a policy that short-term rentals are permitted if they go through and hit these certain items and so while I empathize I don't think what was discussed today for me at least would leave me to deny this particular one so with that being said I'm going to move to approve PLM BOA 2546 compound properties request for conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in the single-family zone at property at 1 7 7 0 Yorktown Road based upon the staff's recommendation of approval the testimony given and subject to the conditions set forth therein thank you madam chair before we vote I'd like to just say that that board member grosses pretty much said exactly what I was thinking and I and I totally understand your concerns I think you will find that with good management it's not going to have a major impact on your community one of the things that the one of things that the council has done is change the change the ordinance so there's there's not a heavy in impact of in STRs on a neighborhood and it used to be not that way and you could have several in within your basic community one in your community I think you'll find it will not be objectable I hope that's true but I certainly do understand your concern and I think this whole board does however they vote so I just want to mention that before we vote thank you ma'am and also remind you there is the hotline so if they're violating code violations and other items you can report them for the coat for them to come out thank you I just want to say thank you though too this is nothing against you but I think it's important that the neighbors have their views heard and their opinions be heard and we appreciate you all coming down here and being part of the process and I can tell you really care about your neighborhood so thank you for coming thank you wonderful thing additional all right we'll take a vote if the motion is passed good luck thank you all right okay okay our next item is PLN BOA 25-47 dr. Jitender duty dr. duty good afternoon good afternoon Lauren Nichols of Denton Spingham Greenbaum on behalf of dr. duty unfortunately he's tied up at the hospital right now he's still in a surgery so I'm gonna do my best without and I'm sorry will you hold just a minute let's let them yeah that's okay okay all right thank you please thank you and I have reviewed the staff report we do accept all of the conditions wonderful so that I had she said that has been recommended for approval and there are seven conditions that have been listed and you all are in acceptance of it so at this time do you want to tell us a little bit about the project or here public comment first yes absolutely so the comprehensive plan encourages the city to promote tourism in 3284 Paris Pike is an ideal accommodation of guests to our community the home is over six thousand seven hundred square feet it has eight bedrooms and six baths and it's on nearly eight acre track right on Paris Pike it's a mile and a half from the urban service boundary and it's surrounded on three sides by Keeneland's a thoroughbred Center where they not only engage in horse training but they already host lots of events there's no short-term rentals now within one mile and I also wanted to recognize I guess I can go ahead and put the map to the extent that it's helpful one of the conditions involved the Health Department septic and I wanted to update and make sure that that's a part of the record I recognize it was not part of the staff meeting thank you so unfortunately the Health Department will not inspect existing septic systems but it has been inspected by a designee of the Health Department Lex Ritter and it's been found to be in good condition and it can accommodate the occupancy that we're requesting so that condition has already been met by the applicant there's also ample paved area on the property as you can see to accommodate at least eight vehicles on the driveway another three vehicles if needed in the garage and three in a covered carport area and just to clarify the outbuildings of the property would not be used as part of the occupancy it would just be when I'm talking about the home I'm just reflecting on the large home itself in the middle of the property there the driveway is gated and is well lit directly off of Paris Pike and dr. Judy will be placing smoke detectors in every room and fire extinguishers throughout the home I will clarify he does have a current agricultural tenant who is using the property right now for livestock and farming that tenant had given him a notice to vacate in is actively vacating the property is my understanding and so once he fully vacates dr. Judy will continue on with the rest of his improvements and get the property up for short-term rental he will also be as part of that installing exterior cameras to be able to properly survey the property keep up with noise and any issues in real time as well and I'm happy to answer any questions you guys would have yeah do we have questions of the applicant I just like to just comment it seems like a ideal location for STR and I I can see people just really enjoying that that opportunity I am a little concerned about the number of people and the 16 people seemed like we're approaching a motel here rather than an STR so can you can you speak to that and also if you would the Paris Pike corridor obviously had some objections could you speak to that as well yes I am happy to speak on both fronts the occupancy would be an absolute maximum occupancy so 16 and it is an eight-bedroom home without doing any reconfiguration of the interior there are six bathrooms right now and we would be looking to reconfigure to add about one more bathroom so that it would be ample bathroom spaces for the house and the idea being that if they were to have any sort of anything they would never exceed 16 people and I agree with you on this being an absolute perfect place for a short-term rental especially given the fact that the thoroughbred center will often host weddings and so this would allow the family of the bride or the family of the groom perhaps to stay together right next to the venue of where they're getting married and so the idea being that you could have a family associated with the thoroughbred center to be able to stay right there on the property and with the Paris Pike corridor the the objections that I heard I did attend the meeting as well the objections I heard were more generally about short-term rentals and just the concern of spreading commercialization into AG units in general I do know that miss Perkins is here and she's on the Commission and I'm sure she would like to speak as well she and I spoke in the hallway she expressed concerns about fireworks at events perhaps which frankly I feel as though the county already has a firework ordinance in place she's also expressed some concerns about having agricultural uses on the property if a person were to bring an animal and livestock what that would mean in my opinion that's in line with the agricultural uses already in existence and frankly I think you're gonna have less agricultural uses as a short-term rental than you would as a long-term rental I think it also speaks volumes that Keeneland has not given any objection or otherwise reached out to us to express any sort of opposition to this yeah well I think there we have the meeting and I believe miss Perkins is here in attendance as well and we will let miss Perkins speak but they they did not issue an objection or give a recommendation as a whole okay it was anything else of the applicant and then we'll open for a public comment thank you thank you yes please you afternoon good afternoon good world bless all of you for okay the work you did I know we know you but if you please my name is Catherine Perkins I live at 258 Swigert Avenue on the north side and I am a thoroughbred trainer owner who currently leases one barn at the Thoroughbred Center 3380 Paris Pike I am also a commissioner on the Paris Pike Corridor Commission and I was present at the special meeting on May 5th held online for this be okay but I want to make it clear I am NOT here as a representative of the Paris Pike Corridor Commission I can answer any questions about my recollection and interpretation of that meeting but only if you ask me so I'm here more as a citizen whose business is thrives around or centers around the Thoroughbred Center and we train racehorses and I am concerned about what isn't in this short-term rental ordinance for ag and how it will affect me and I believe it one of what was I was not that that well organized but oh it's a section 313 general regulations that this will not create a nuisance to adjacent adjoining property so as the applicant stated I am concerned about ag use that is not in the in the short-term rental ordinance prohibiting ag use or allowing it dogs pets cats and I don't care about cats sorry but but currently we thoroughbred trainers are under a federal regulation so we have to file so much paperwork on every horse that comes into our barn and leaves our barn this is federally recognized I mean we everything and this property is single-fenced I think that that needs to be a condition that there has to be proper fencing on that property so if they want to use it because unless you want to condition it to say no ag uses which is you know that's a condition and pets dogs cats currently the tenant who lives there does have dogs that come out onto the training center spook horses and they've called on them so I think that that's a good reason to encourage inspection of fencing being double fenced or something like that to ensure that my horses are safe and that they file proper paperwork that it's given to the thoroughbred Center on any if they do any animals that they have health certificates proper vaccination because as an ag use in a short-term rental they can they don't have to comply with that but if my horse gets sick I'm looking at or if my horse gets hurt if my help gets hurt so I know that there's nothing in the short-term rental ordinance that says they can't have shoot off fireworks music outdoor speakers 11 to 7 or the hours they cannot have a private property 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. I train horses until 11 a.m. other people train horses to tell 11 a.m. until the track closes and this is important you can have a private party with loudspeakers and music going on while I'm trying to train my horses and so these things I think need to be conditioned in and I mean I don't care about the short-term rental in itself thank you we do we appreciate it questions thank you okay was there anyone else to speak on this particular item all right if the applicant would come forth again and as we mentioned it has been recommended for approval and there are multiple conditions that we seems you already accepted do we have any more questions of the applicant any concerns if not I will entertain a motion we need further discussion I'll give a motion I'll give a motion for PLM VO a 25-0 0 4 7 requests a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental with an occupancy greater than 10 and an agricultural rule zone on the property located at 32 84 Paris Pike along with all the conditions as stated motion to approve thank you do we have a second mr. Walker has offered a second and we'll open this for a vote got Brandon there is recusing my motion is passed good luck with the project thank you for your time okay we have one more pill in BOA 25-50 BK wholesome homes good afternoon please state your name for the record Brandon Whitehead okay this looks like it has been recommended for approval up to eight occupants the correct and there are four conditions that have been listed have you had the opportunity to review those yes ma'am okay and are we comfortable with each of those conditions yes ma'am okay now was there anyone here to speak regarding this we do okay so if you'd like to tell us a little bit about your plans and then we'll open for public comment okay so my name is Brandon Whitehead I'm the owner of BK wholesome homes we're a property management company small family boutique property management company and we would be operating this property on behalf of the property owner we have a lot of things in place we'll have local local teams cleaners landscapers all that stuff in place to make sure that the property is well maintained well taken care of we also will you utilize smart locks coded locks that will integrate with our systems that we use we also have UV outdoor cameras and simply say outdoor camera as well that way we can track who's coming in and out we also plan to use noise monitoring software which would be through minute or noise aware those both monitor noise levels and once it reads a certain decibel level it will notify us as the property manager stating that you know the noise inside this room is over so many decibels we also wanted to state that we're good with the eight occupants when I was putting this application together I was reading the old ordinance that said you know two per room plus four so that's how I got to the ten so eight is not a problem at all on on that front so at this point if there's any other questions do we have any questions now we'll let the public comment speak or give the public an opportunity thank you for this opportunity speak today so I am Dylan Adams my wife and I moved to Danby corners neighborhood December 2020 and with that being said we have a few concerns about the proposal honestly speaking I don't think it's going to be anything novel from other things that you've heard today so I don't expect it to change the outcome but I do think it's important to voice my concerns nonetheless so one unique thing that I do want to bring up is the concern about traffic and parking so while this is one short-term rental property there is a concern that I have it specifically in this general vicinity of this location so the way our neighborhood set up Grafton's mill is a it's the street that everybody has to enter and exit throughout our neighborhood and it results in kind of a a little bit of a backup of traffic coincidentally very close to this house because it's kind of in a bend and many cars park on both sides of the street and that kind of results in a little bit of a maze that you're kind of having to go through of stopping allowing people to come through right so because it's three cars wide so you have to make room for that so there's that concern but also there's a school bus stop just down the road from this it's down the road from Liberty Elementary there's lots of kids in the area right so just increased traffic kind of brings up another concern with lots of kids I've had to stop several times in the road for kids maybe I'm going to get a ball out of the road right it's happened countless times over the past couple of years of living here so just something to note noise issues I won't harp on that much I think that's been said enough today but it is a concern I do like the idea of having some noise monitor but my concern would be more of the outdoors monitoring kind of the deck or in any like loud music maybe on the outside of the property also again it does alter the character of our neighborhood I do feel that it is basically opening a business up in our neighborhood right you're kind of placing a hotel and in the middle of that so that's more on short-term rentals in general but and some of these other points are too but again this increases housing costs it drives up the cost of well for long-term renters but also a housing for permanent permanent residents so maintenance and appearance issues that's a possibility but if proper man property managers okay maybe not so much of a concern but I think more than anything it sets the precedent you know it reduces the supply of that affordable housing when that's a crisis across our nation I don't think it is I'm not going to pretend that short-term rentals as the cause for that but it certainly exacerbates the issue and also I don't think the lack of short-term rentals will take away from tourism in Lexington I don't think we're struggling there and my concern is how close are we going to get to that 2% limit within our neighborhood I don't want to target that right but yeah my request for the board is really to just not take this decision lightly it's going to impact me and all my neighbors and given the number of applicants today that we've seen for short-term rentals I don't expect this will be the last one in their neighborhood so that's my kind of bigger concern here so thank you we appreciate it okay was there anyone else the applicant will come back if you'd like to address any issues or having conversation yes so we we pride ourselves our company is called BK wholesome homes we want to bring the heart of our home into the heart of the home of the clients that we you work with as well as the guests using it so we want to create and craft extravagant experiences to create wholesome memories my family is a small family of four and that's the target market that we want to bring into this property maybe bring two families together that are two families of four to not go over that eight max occupancy so we just want to target the great guests create wholesome memories we also want to work with local Lexington companies to provide different experiences you know maybe coupons for guests coming in to help boost local economy you know we came in yesterday and there's some great places around that I would love to partner with in the future so as far as noise outside I believe those noise monitoring systems can be used outside as well but there's also those outdoor cameras that we can check if that were to come up thank you do we have questions of the applicant this is this question is kind of more for staff so did you apply for the short-term rental but it's owned by looks like it's owned by Brian Garland and we have a letter here from him saying that he can represent him but it doesn't even have a date on it the letter saying that he has permission to so is this I guess my question would be is this acceptable all right so are you proposed to run the business that's correct yes but not own the property correct so the ownership will remain the same which means mr. Gardner will need to apply for the license with the Division of Revenue okay it wouldn't be in the BK wholesome homes name okay so do you sorry law do you want them to issue the conditional use to mr. Garland as well I think what we've done in the past and what makes sense with the ordinance is to issue it to the owners I know that they have approval from the owners to do the application so that shouldn't be an issue but the owners as per the deed are Brian Garland and Armin Garland that's correct yes so technically the conditional use permit would be for them and I'm assuming BK wholesome homes is going to be the entity that manages the property say that again sorry are you is your company going to be the one that manages the property that's correct that's why you got the approval okay so I would suggest the motion to approve if you decide to do that you would make it for Brian Garland and Armin Garland who are the record owners on the deed yeah but you know it's similar to we do this all the time with the architects and engineers that come in they're the ones who name is on the application that's true but we have an ordinance saying that it has to be issued to the owner or the SDR it's in the actual ordinance that's why it's specific okay so any motion would be in the name of Brandon Brian I just had a concern because I found this letter and it doesn't like even have a date or anything on it and so yeah the Brian Garland okay it seems a little okay do we want to use the the name off the PVA website correctly I could give you that or do we want to use the name on the thing who's making them if it should be the same as the deed we have the deed I just was unsure about it so I want clarification no that's it's a fair observation I don't think we know okay all right nothing further is there a motion real quick the name on the deed there are two names on the deed so it should be in both their names even though they didn't apply for it I think you raise a fair point I think it would actually be okay since the letter just says Brian Garland I Armin Garland may not have a problem with with this but since it doesn't say you could just it would still be fine for Brian Garland since he has an ownership interest to proceed with the CUP so you could just name them in the motion because we don't have Armin Garland here don't have anything from Armin Garland so Brian Gardner would be sufficient Garland I would like to make a note to that on the application that does say that somebody can apply on behalf of the owner so we did follow those steps that the application put forward so just wanted to make sure that I was really fine to apply for them it's just that the ordinance specifies that the permits are going to be issued to the owner of the property so that's what we're just clarifying so that it goes to the right people awesome thank you and that's specific to the STR ordinance yeah you make me question my last six eight how many years eight years okay all right so I'll entertain a motion at this time madam chair moved to approve PLN BOA 2 5-5 0 BK I'm sorry Brian Garland request for a conditional use permit for an unhosted short-term rental in a single-family residential zone located on property at 742 Grafton Mills Lane 712 okay 712 Grafton Mills Lane based on staff recommendations including approval for eight occupants which I'm assuming you're okay with and subject to the four conditions okay and mr. personally has seconded any further conversation we'll take a vote thank you is that it are we at the end okay do we have any other staff items or board items okay okay good we'll call it quits our next meeting will be June the 9th at 130 we'll see you all at this time at that time meeting adjourned