our council are counsel is

brittany smith.

Our board members on my right,

james pursley, chad walker,

linda tucker, I'm bob sturdivant

and I will be chairing the

meeting today.

To my left is harry clark and

brandon gross.

Ross boggess is not here today.

If there are any active or

retired military in the room

today, would you please stand

Seeing none, we are going to

move on to our agenda you should

way.

Please refer to that.

I'll make a joint motion to

approve both at the same time.

So moved.

Brandon gross made the motion,

seconded by linda tucker.

Please cast your vote.

Raise your right hand.

You promise to tell the truth,

the whole truth and nothing but

the truth?

>> I do.

Thank you.

Please be seated.

Now we are going to sound the

agenda.

Which means we are going to go

over each case and put them in

the appropriate place on the

docketed you should have a

handout sheet that you picked up

that tells you about this

process.

Our docket has two sections.

Section a is for the variances

and conditional use permits.

Section b is for short-term

rentals.

Each section has two parts.

The expedited section and the

heard section.

The criteria for the expedited

section is planning has

recommended approval and we have

no opposition.

The heard section planning

recommends disapproval or we

have opposition present.

The same criteria goes for the

short-term rentals section.

You will see that we have two

cases that would like to

postpone until the NOVEMBER 9,

2026 meeting.

First application is

pln-boa-26-75, wood lake

properties.

If could I have a motion to

postpone.

>> MR. Chair, I move to

postpone the woodlake properties

application to the NOVEMBER 9,

meeting.

Clerk: motion by MR. Clark. Second? >> second.

Chair: second by MR. Pursley. Please cast your vote. Thank you. >> MR. Chair, you MAY want to ask if anyone is here attending for this one and explain to them that it has been postponed until next month. I'm not sure if there is anyone in the crowd related here. are you aware of this? Were you in opposition? >> no. (Inaudible). planning staff. >> sorry, I didn't hear, if you are going to speak, can you come up to the microphone. >> I'm just here on behalf of woodlake properties. So I'm not in opposition. I'm part of the llc. For woodlake properties? >> are you wanting to continue this? >> I was wanting to postpone. i was told to show up to say that we would like to postpone. >> if you state your name for the record. >> rebecca wirth. >> thank you, MS. Worth. I did see two hands who MAY be in opposition. >> opposition. >> okay. This case has been postponed until next month so will you need to come back at 1:30 next month. Did you submit written opposition? Then we have copies of that. And we will be able to read that. But unfortunately you will have to come back in 30 days. >> if they postpone again (Inaudible). >> at some point they will withdraw or it will be heard. >> when I come on the 9th... (Inaudible). >> in theory, it could be postponed one more time. But I guess could you explain why you postponed, MS. Worth? >> we postponed because the planning committee is asking for more documentation on a few things from us so they're just asking us to clarify a few things on our cam -- our application. We are planning on doing that with them in the next couple of weeks and then they want a couple written documents from like the businesses around there. So we are getting that. >> what I would suggest, since we have two citizens here is maybe could you talk in the hallway out there and they can ask you questions. sometimes p with more information or you guys MAY be able to address some of the concerns, and that way you can build them into your plan that you submit to staff and it MAY potentially help the process along. >> okay. Wonderful. Yeah I would be more than happy to do that. >> that's what I would suggest on your way out, if you want to talk with MS. Worth, exchange information and maybe she could answer any questions you MAY have. You need to come up to the podium. >> it appears that the business is being worked on at this time. So some kind of remodel. And I'm unaware if it's what they want to do or the owner of the property that is fixing something up. Is that standard for if that is them doing the construction work? >> sometimes you can start renovating because the request MAY not be tied to the renovation. And so it depends. It's a chicken and egg situation. If you want to talk with one of the staffers right behind you and exchange information, they can tell what you permit has been filed and MS. Worth MAY be able to tell you on the way out which permit has been pulled. They could start construction if it's not related to why they need the permit. Thank you. >> thank you all. >> I'm sorry, sir. Can you state your name for the record? Sir? >> clifford birdsong, 116, cherry bark drive. >> thank you. >> our next case for postponement on page 1 is pln-boa-26-84, barnes mill form ii llc requests a postponement until NOVEMBER 9, 2026 meeting could I have a motion? >> chair, I would point out that for clarity sake, the bylaws say if there is a postponement that's being requested, that you asked audience if anyone is here to object to that request and the applicant can state the reason for the postponement and then the board can choose to make a motion and postpone. >> I just assumed by the early postponements that someone had done this by phone or by email. Is this correct? >> yes, we have email communication from the applicant that they were requesting postponement for these two applicants that are listed at the beginning of the agenda. The reason that this applicant was requesting postponement and I'm not sure if they're here today, but it was because they did not qualify for the type of request they were making so they had to change the request. So new notice is going to be sent out for next month as well. >> okay. I assumed they wouldn't be here but we will ask. Is is anyone here for barnes mill farm llc? Hearing none, any opposition to this? thank you all. >> I will make a motion for a one-month postponement of this case. >> motion by MR. Gross. >> second second by MRS. Tucker. Please cast your vote. Thank you. Now we will go on to our variance appeals at the bottom of page 1 of your agenda pln-boa-26-51 nicholas wolter. Is the applicant present? Thank you. You don't need to come up right now. Just want to make sure you were here. This has been recommended for disapproval. So it will be heard case number 1 under conditional uses and variances. Moving to page 2 of the agenda pln-boa-26-58, matthew gene lawson. Is the applicant here? >> chair, this applicant has request a one-month postponement because they are discussing the property line dispute from the last hearing. is anyone here in opposition to pln-boa-26-58? Thank you. This will be postponed until the NOVEMBER meeting. >> could I have a motion. >> I move for a one-month postponement of this case. >> second. >> motion by MR. Gross. Second by MR. Clark. Please cast your vote. We need a vote here. Thank you. Moving on on page 2, item 3, pln-boa-26-71, embrey property management llc is the applicant here? Thank you. Staff recommends disapproval of this application. So it will go under the variances and conditional use on the heard docket item number Moving on to the bottom of page 2, pln-boa-26-77, thaddeus robert salmon, iii, applicant is present. Do we have any opposition to this application? With no opposition, we will put this pln-boa-26-77 as the first item on the expedited docket for variances. Moving to pages 3. Item 5, pln-boa-26-78, colleen harmeling. Is the applicant present? Thank you. Is anyone here in opposition to this application. Seeing none, staff has recommend add professional of this. We will put pln-boa-26-78 as the second item on the conditional uses and variances expedited docket. Moving to the bottom of page 3, pln-boa-26-79 canopy property management llc. Applicant is here staff has recommended disapproval of this application. Pln-boa-26-79 will be the third item on the conditional uses and variances heard docket moving to page 4. Under conditional use appeals, pln-boa-26-38, berea christian church. Applicant is here do we have anyone to speak in opposition to this? We will move pln-boa-26-38 as item 4 on the conditional use and variances heard docket. Moving on page 5, item 2, tnt kentucky estates llc, a conditional use permit for unhosted short-term rental. >> this applicant indicated in an email that they would like to request a two-month postponement. The reason they provided is that they're located out of state and would not be able to travel in-state to the hearing in OCTOBER or NOVEMBER so they would like to postpone to theness -- to the DECEMBER 14 hearing. >> is the applicant here for this application? 26-63, is there anyone here in opposition? >> I will move for a two-month postponement as requested. >> have a motion by MR. Gross. >> second by MR. Clark. Please cast your vote. Thank you. Moving to the top of page 6, item 3, pln-boa-26-73, idle hour country club. Is the applicant present? Is there any opposition to this? Hearing none, we will move pln-boa-26-73 to third item on the conditional uses and variances expedited docket. Moving to number 4, middle of page, pln-boa-26-80, H.G. Homes of kentucky, llc. Staff has recommend add professional of this. Is there any opposition here? Seeing none, we will put 26-80 as number 1 on the str expedited docket for short-term rentals. Moving to the top of page 7, item 5, pln-boa-26-81 boones creek baptist church. is the applicant here? Staff has recommend add professional for this. Is anyone here in opposition? Seeing none, pln-boa-26-81 will be item 4 on the conditional use variances expedited docket. Moving on item 6 at the bottom of page 7, pln-boa-26-82, compass capital retail partners llc, applicant is here staff has recommended disapproval of this application so it will move to item 5 on the conditional uses variance heard docket. It will be pln-boa-26-82. Moving to the top of page 8 of your agenda. Pln-boa-26-83, tearica cobb, staff has recommended approval for this application. Is there anyone here in opposition. Conditional use permit for a home-based business. This will move to -- there is opposition? (Inaudible). if you want to speak... If you want to speak in opposition, will you have your time. >> yes. okay, thank you. Then this will move to item number 6 on the serred docket pln-boa-26-83. All right. We'll start hearing our cases. First case on the expedited docket for conditional uses and variances pln-boa-26-77 thaddeus robert salmon. Staff has recommend add professional for this application based on two conditions. Have you read those? Are you agreeable to those? >> yes. does anyone have any questions or comments? >> I don't have access to documents on accela. There is a document button but it's graid out and it won't pull It's gray. >> is this where you live? >> yes. >> thank you. did you read the can thans? >> yes. >> and you are in agreement with those? >> yes. any questions for the applicant? >> MR. Chair I recommend approval of pln-boa-26-77, thaddeus robert salmon. Request for variance to reduce the required side yard setback for an accessory structure that projects between the principal structure and the right side lot line from eight feet to one and a half feet in order to construct a detached garage in a single-family residential zone on property located at 929 idlewild court based on the staff's recommendation and the two conditions as listed. motion by MR. Clark. Do I have a second? >> second. second by MR. Pursley. Any further discussion? Please cast your vote. Thank you. You have been approved. >> thank you. item 2 on the expedited docket. Pln pln-boa-26-78, colleen harmeling. Please step up. please state your name for the record. >> my name is craig rashine and I'm here representing colleen harmeling. thank you. Staff has recommended approval of this application based on two conditions. Are you in agreement with those? >> yes, I am. does the board have any questions for the applicant? Can I have a motion, plew snies. >> MR. Chair, I move to approve pln-boa-26-78 colleen harmeling's request for a variance to increase the allowable floor ratio area from .35 to.457 in order toe construct an addition within the infill and redevelopment zone and an h-1 overlay district in a single-family residential zone on property located at 335 transylvania park based on staff's recommendations and subject to the two conditions. I have a motion. Do I have a second? >> second. who was that second? James. MR. Walker made a motion, MR. Pursley with the second. Any further discussion? Thank you. You have been approved. >> thank you. >> MR. Gross. next item, 3 on the expedited docket for conditional uses and variances is pln-boa-26-73 idle hour country club. Will the applicant please step up and state your name, please. >> jeff jefferson. >> MR. Harrison, have you read... >> jefferson. Jeff jefferson. >> thank you. Staff has recommended approval based on two conditions. Are you familiar with those? >> I am. and you are in agreement with those? >> I am. any questions from the board? >> MR. Chair, I will move for approval of pln-boa-b-2 26-26-73 for country club in order to construct a bar within the infill and redevelopment area in an r-1b zone at 1815 richmond richmond road based upon the staff's report and subject to the conditions therein. Thank you. motion from MR. Gross. Do I have a second? >> second. second from MRS. Tucker. Any further discussion please cast your vote. Thank you. You have been approved. >> thank you. last item on the expedited docket for variances and conditional uses is pln-boa-26-81. Boones creek baptist church. Will the the applicant please step up to the podium. State your name for the record. >> joseph fields. staff has recommended approval of your application. Based on six conditions. Have you read those? >> I have. are you in agreement with those? >> yes. any questions or comments from the board? >> MR. Chair,ly move for approval of pln-boa-26-81 boones creek baptist church request to amend an existing can you please for a can you please of religious assembly in order to construct a residence in the ar zone on north cleveland road based upon the planning staff's report and subject to the conditions set forth therein. motion from MR. Gross. I have a second? >> second. second from MRS. Tucker. Any further discussion? Please cast your vote. Boons creek has been approved. >> great. Thank you all. that concludes our expedited docket for conditional uses and variances. We will move on to our heard docket. First item being pln-boa-26-51 nicholas wolter. Staff will present first as it has been recommended for disapproval principal planner with planning staff. The first item on the heard agenda is a request for variances in order to accommodate parking in the front yard area. So this will be for property located at 716 harrison trace and they requesting to reduce that required front yard from five feet to zero feet once again to accommodate parking area. So here we have the subject property outlined in this bluish shade here. It's basically the elbow of this cul-de-sac here of development that is building out. This is an area that was developed as a part of the first 1996 expansion so ear-2 zoning. So in the general vicinity here, we have the interstate and to the right is the larger joyland neighborhood. And so once again, this is sort of a newer piece of that neighborhood coming online with newer construction. Zooming in to the actual conditions of the subject property. Here is the home itself. The home has been constructed. The applicant is essentially asking for permission to construct a paving area here, directly in front of the home to serve as a parking area. The plat of the property kind of shows kind of why the conditions we have on site are applicable. So the site itself is located once again on a curve. So it hassation bit of an unusual shape but the rear portion of the property essentially is undeveloppable due to easements and other required setbacks. The house itself is basically built to the largest extent possible so unlike other homes in the area, there isn't sufficient space for an attached garage. So the applicant is requesting today to construct a paved parking area in the front yard area. Staff's concern with this application kind of largely lies with the dimensions associated with the request. so the area between the front wall plane of the house and that behave paved area there when you hit the sidewalk is not large enough to accommodate a full parking space so it is a situation where constructing it as proposed most vehicles would over hang on the public right of way causing a health and safety concern. Additionally, as you all are aware, we typically do not recommend approval for variances for front yard paving areas. Those are consistent across residential zones and difficult wanted to bring up -- did want to bring up, how this house is a unique situation relative to other homes in the area. So it's a little tough to see on the imagery but most of the homes are longer in nature and have these attached garages so they're able to have a paved parking area that leads to that. However, because the house is located on the bend here, it's smaller in size. It's limited as far as it's ability to go back and has a much more limited ability to accommodate paving in the front area. Other driveways in the vicinity leading to the garages are 30 feet in size, more than adequate to handle additional vehicular traffic as well. So this is a situation where just the way the house was built out, the dimensions, doesn't leave, when staff's estimate, enough room to safely accommodate a vehicle, so with that, staff is recommending disapproval. Finding that there is not sufficient space to accommodate the parked vehicles in the driveway without blocking the parking in the area. Staff did not find the prohibition in the front yard parking area would deprive the applicant of use of the land. There is on street parking available on harrison's trace and finally, it's not an unreasonable, it could allow an unreasonable circumvention of the requirements of the ordinance as prohibition of parking in the front yard is consistent across the residential zones and additionally, the expansion area residential zones have additional criteria. Staff recommends disapproval and happy to entertain any questions you have of staff at this time. >> I have a few questions. First question is what is the standard parking space? It looks like they're asking for a 10'x 14 feet. >> 9 x 18 is the standard. >> it's four feet short of the standard? >> yes. >> I don't have a cross section. So it's hard for me to tell so we've got the sidewalk though is outside of that 14 feet. >> yes. Yes. >> and then could we go back to the aerial that shows the two, the houses as they're built? So the one to the right -- okay, I see the one to the right has more than 14 feet. >> and it is also leading to a garage. So it's a little bit -- once again, difficult to see but this white piece here is a garage door. this site because it's constraints is built out as actually living space instead. That's an actual living room or window opposed to a garage. >> but if there were a garage, they could then have the pad even though it's only 14 feet? >> yes, if you've got an off street parking space, as would be provided in agarage, then this that driveway could be located there. >> okay. So it's really... You probably have a couple issues, but the main issue to me appears to be the length is only 14 rather than 18 feet. >> the primary objection that staff had with this was in this specific instance, that lack of space and once again the house is already there, right of way is there so there is basically not an ability to make a change that would check all the boxes that we would need to be comfortable from a health, safety and welfare perspective 9 x 18 is the standard. >> I have my numbers all wrong. Thank you, MR. Crum. >> any other questions? >> yeah, I had a question so when I went by there, too, it looked like there were a lot of houses like were you pointing out that were the same or similar design but they chose to put the garage where the two windows are opposed to making a room there. So that was the builder's choice, not to put the garage there versus a room. >> and I think it also speaks to the other lots in the vicinity. they go back deeper and you see a deeper house. While I can't speak for the builders specific thought, they had move room to incorporate an attached garage. Based on the dimensions of the lot, it would be difficult to make that functional because it's on the bend of the cull de cul-de-sac with the easement. The house was built without the accommodations. >> thank you. >> one more question. Is there controlled parking on that? More of an elbow than a cul-de-sac? Is there controlled parking. >> not that many that I'm aware >> any other questions? >> would the applicant like to come up? please state your name for the record please. >> nicholas wolter. >> thank you for your time and thank you to staff for pointing out some of the things for the reasons for this approval. I will wait for them to pull this up because my presentation is laid out around my powerpoint. Forgive my cracking I was screaming all night saturday night so I will sound a little bit hoarse. My hope is to provide additional information that addresses the concerns you heard from staff. This particular property as you just heferred is designed a little bit differently than the other lots that we built on. What you are seeing is a picture from yesterday morning. That home is uncock pied. 716 has no tenants. Nobody owns -- well, we own the house but it's not been sold. 720, we also built. That house has been sold. 716 was the first house that we actually built and then we ran into this issue of not being able to put a driveway in. So you can see right here, even before we have tenants or the home being purchased by somebody , we don't have any parking. This parking is taken up by the neighbors at 720 along with their visitors. That little a really important part of why I'm here today is the street parking situation. Lot restrictions, the staff says the lots are more restricted than other lots in the subdivision. The site plan submitted, I went back and forth with building inspection about this particular lot. Due to the setback and the need to have, I believe 25 feet in order to have a garage there, were not many designs could I find to fit this. I have been very apt on buildig homes can I can sell for under $210 a square foot. It's important to me and I wasn't really trying to spend more money on an architect and pass those costs on to the homeowner. So that was the reason that we stuck with the same design. We just changed that garage layout and turned it into a primary ensuite in homes hopes to create multigenerational housing which you don't have on this house what -- that you don't have on this street whatsoever. i'm not asking for a variance because would I prefer a driveway, as you just saw on the first slide. Street parking is already limited and I'm asking for this variance because of the physical limitations, again, that staff has already recognized for the special circumstances. I went by and did some more measuring because it was my initial understanding that my lot needed to be 9 x 14. I misheard and it's actually supposed to be 9 x 18. Fortunately, I have 9 x 18. At the smallest bend, I've got 17 feet nine inches. The biggest is 18 feet 11 inches. So if I go 10 feet at the far right, if you are looking at the house far right, 10 feet over, I'm actually at 18'1 oi so" so I full within that 18-foot need. Initially requested the 14 feet because I was trying to do a four foot landscape buffer between the house and the driveway, again, not understanding that I actually needed the 18 feet. >> MR. Chair, I guess two things. Assume assuming he is correct in his measurements, aaassuming we would move forward with an approval we would have to have an updated site plan at least a revised one. >> yeah, he submitted a revise the site plan. He redimensioned it and took out a line. >> did patty send that to us? >> he just sent it this morning. >> let me ask the staff this with the revised site plan, are you guys going to be in a position to say we are okay with the site plan if we were to move forward? >> I think part of the -- daniel crum planning staff. I think part of the concern from staff as far as the limited amount we saw this morning is essentially draws from the front wall plane of the structure all the way back to the property line so it starts at the edge of the house. Staff does have a little bit of a safety concern there where it's encouraging one of two things. The possibility of accidentally driving through your living room window or you are having a buffer area between the front plane of the house, not wanting to get too close when you park. Going to end up into that 18 feet. So that piece kind of combined with at forementioned kind of general approach toward front yard parking within the expansion area is sort of staff's initial I think reflection but we haven't had time to evaluate that as a group but that's what popped up originally. It would be better for us to discuss whether or not we should continue this until next month so we don't spend 30, 45 minutes hashing over a plan the staff has not looked at yet and had their own comments about. Does that make sense? >> yes, sir. >> rather than us -- >> yes, sir. And so I am just opening that up for efficiently sake. I am sympathetic but also realize that we can't have substandard parking spaces being created because that will block. >> I would be in favor of a postponement. >> continuance. continuance, sorry and would I like to also say that this is a situation that we are going to continue to have in this city because we are trying to build more and we are going to be faced with the fact that we are going to have problems with parking. So I think this is a perfect sesm example of that and some of this will be -- will not be a new areas like this but in other areas we MAY need -- we made MAY need to deal with this. Not something the board of adjustment can do but at the same time this is a perfect example of the kind of problem we are dealing with and so I think continuance here would probably be a good idea, to give the staff a chance to look at it again and then give us a chance to discuss it further. >> and I will say be prepared to answer why this was not addressed at the permitting stage. >> I was curious about staff's thoughts on that and I know I'm not disagreeing with you, but I know you showed that picture of the cars but there are two vacant lots right to the other side the one where he showed sunday morning with all the cars. Because there is room on the cull z sack so to the left of the gray car so to the left is -- vacant lots. So there is -- 712 harrison trace, which is you can see here that's going to be a home. alt some point or another and to the left of that is 708 harrison trace, which, from my understanding doesn't have the setbacks allowable for a driveway right now either I have learned from 716 that I need to meet with you all first ordeal with staff before I even begin, thus the growth. But this isn't going to be a one off situation just in this particular area. >> okay, thank you. I was curious about staff with this with the continuance, what you all felt about that. >> a continuance would give the folks at traffic engineering as well a chance to look at it. But once again we are responding from this morning, but we have kind of outlaid our concerns in the staff report but if the be happy to discuss with the applicant and review any new materials I move to continue this NOVEMBER. >> second. motion by MR. Gross for a continuance. Second. Any further discussion? Please cast your vote. Moving on to item number 2 on the conditional uses and variances heard docket pln-boa- 26-71, embrey properties management llc. Staff recommends disapproval of this so they will present first. >> good afternoon. If you recall from the meeting last month, this item was continued. This applicant is seeking two variances to allow an existing accessory structure that is non-conforming in terms of height and square footage to be used as an accessory dwelling units. At last month's hearing, the applicant did indicate that they MAY be interested in pursuing connecting the two structures with a conditioned bleez way. -- breeze way. They did upload a site plan for that but they uploaded it this morning, so planning staff and boa staff have not had time to evaluate that new site plan to see if it meets ordinance requirements so as of right now, planning staff's recommendation of disapproval does still stand and we do not have a presentation to make at this time. Thank you. >> MR. Chair, this MAY be another one that we punt until next month. >> please state your name. >> riley isaacs. I do really apologize for it not being uploaded. I did not receive it back from the architect until this morning. We ran into issues with foundation that we had to get inspected before pursuing the architect's plans. So we are okay with postponing that if that seems like would be ac with that. We can do it next month. >> given that we haven't heard any testimony, I would say we postpone until NOVEMBER hearing second for postponement. Second for MR. Clark please cast your vote. Thank you. Third item is pln-boa-26-79 canopy property management llc. Staff has recommended disapproval of this application so it will present first? >> stop me if have you heard this one. Daniel crum planning staff. Next item on the agenda is number a variances designed to accommodate a front yard parking lot as well as redevelopment occurring at the property of 246 idaho avenue. Taking a look, a small narrow lot run ago long the train tracks here. On opposite sides of the road, we have florida street and dakota street that end in the property or end on idaho street. Here is a view of the subject property from the roadway. Once again a very small narrow lot. This actually is sort of -- in the frame that we are seeing here is actually two lots so this is an extremely narrow parcel, sort of a remnant piece that has not had a structure in sometime. And is solely accessed from idaho avenue. This is a picture of idaho avenue. Staff has a lot of concerns with the current extent of that roadway. It does not nearly meet the full dimensions that are normally required for normal streets but that does accommodate two-way traffic and unfortunately does feature this railing here as well as the railroad as well as power lines here. This is a site that is difficult to access because of the only access being off of this narrow roadway that connects once again those two adjoining streets. And so in order to access the subject property, you would be maneuvering from this underserved roadway. The the applicant's site plan in front of you is designed to accommodate a duplex. A one over one, two-story structure with each of the two floors being a dwelling unit. And the variances that were you seeing are to accommodate the structure as it is proposed as well as a front yard parking area. Due to the dimensions of the lot and the desire to accommodate the parking spaces for the two units, almost the entirety of the front property line is saved so over 80% of that front yard area would have a parking space So you are seeing requests to once again reduce that front yard to zero to allow the front paved parking, reduce the amounts, the side setgrabbing ajoining property lines, the overall percentage that's associated with this, as well as a rear yard setback to accommodate the actual depth of the structure. So all but the rear yard setback are designed to accommodate the parking area that is associated with this request. This is an area that is within the infill and redevelopment area features housing that was built a significant time ago that generally do not featured paste front parking areas. These are narrower lots where the housings are closer to the front end of the street and most of the adjoining area does utilize onstreet parking. This is florida street and then on the opposite side is dakota street. we do have a real concern for the public health, safety and welfare of having traffic back up into the roadway on such a narrow lot with all of the constraints that are located there. We have found an issue with the character of the general vicinity pointing out these adjoining streets all feature on street paved parking, consistent with kind of that overall pattern that entire community. And then once again, denial of the variances are not going to deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the property. Once again, other properties in the vicinity utilize on street parking and if there was not a parking area in the front yard, there would be enough room to accommodate the structure without the rear yard setback so staff's real concern is just really related to the health, safety and welfare impacts of putting that paving in that area on such a substandard street. But with that, staff is happy to answer any questions you have of success at this time. >> MR. Crum... >> what is the width of idaho street? >> I'm wanting to say, let me bring the staff report out. I believe paved area is about 14 feet but let me confirm that in my report real quick. >> that street is noted one way, >> no, it accommodates two-way traffic. >> for all intents and purposes, it's an alley. Functions as an alley. Daniel, would you go back in your slides to, I can see the orientation of how the lot sits? >> sure. Realistically, looking at the layout, there no on street parking because unless, I mean you are going around the corner and parking in front of someone else's house. Because you can't park on idaho. >> yes. >> I'm really -- I'm very familiar with brucetown. I wish the city would put more money and fix idaho and make it into a standard street compared to how it is. And they just had to go in and spend a lot of money cleaning out a homeless camp within the last two months, that had pretty much taken over the park. That's all the questions I had. >> I just wanted to comment on the letter we received because it talks about it being a pedestrian area with children, it's from a pastor from a church. There are no sidewalks. How would that affect the project if there is not a sidewalk there and we do have pedestrians because they really can't walk along where the guard rail is? >> yeah, so. Here we go. Yeah, so the unfortunate issue here is that this is an existing lot that they have the ability to sort of by right build on if they meet the requirements but idaho avenue does not have enough space to accommodate two weigh traffic fully and did us not feature sidewalks in the vicinity. The mention of the pedestrians in the area. I believe there is a park in the close vicinity that would be a blind spot pulling in and out of the droi was, two driveways. >> would idaho street accommodate a fire truck? >> it looks like the staff report is calling that at 12 feet of pavement. The magic number from planning, while I don't want to speak for fire, 20 feet for their full, you know, larger vehicles but they would serve the property any way they could as an existing lot but it does not meet any measure of our current standards. >> if I can clarify. The fire truck is not 20 feet wide. It's about 12 feet wide, but for circulation and if they need to set up in a particular location, when they find a flat spot, put outriggers out to balance the truck, that's what requires 20 feet. >> and just to clarify one more time. Idaho is more or less an alley. There is lots of these in this area where the city takes care of them, at this roads but super old and about as wide as an allie. They do not have sidewalks. You go down north broadway, around 7 or 6th street, all these houses have the alleys in the back. None of them have guttering or stormwater. They're old alleys that are now roads. >> any further questions for staff. Thank you, daniel applicant please step up. >> I've got some handouts if I can hand them to people. Who would like one? please state your name for the record. >> jeff moore. I think everyone has a copy. >> great. >> thank you to MR. Gross because he did bring up a large part of my argument for this, which is that idaho is a glorified alley. speak up just a bit. >> sorry. Thank you to MR. Gross for talking about idaho street as a glorified alley. It does not have a sidewalk. That's a large part of why I'm requesting the variance is for public safety. You can go to the third page of the packet and I did a traffic analysis where if you park in front of 7675 or 773 florida street, it's roughly 155 feet to walk around the corner to the entrances of our duplex with a significant amount of that being on a public street. And then if you flip to the next page I did a rendering for what a person looks like walking on that public street. And then the next page over is what a car looks like and it seems like there is going to be a lot of people that would be are potential tenants if we are able to build this duplex, it would basically be in danger walking to their home so I think there is deprivation of use by not allowing the parking. In addition this is the duplex the wide pages in the packet are the different areas for park ago rangements bedroom size and such. It's our goal to make affordable housing and the rent on this particular duplex with two dead rooms on each unit would be 1,100 a month. Which is substantially below the county median which is 1258 for a two-bedroom unit. And one of the things that I thought about with the staff comments that I had not considered was backing out on to idaho street. As you are leaving the property. One thing I thought of was, you know, I rendered a sign and will put this into the lease with the tenants that have you to back into the parking area so I do take those comments seriously. And there is a rendering of that as well. But at the end of the day, there is really no access for this. If I can't build a two bedroom two plex, there is no way to make this thing make money even with the 50% loan to value loan on on this project it is a two bedroom duplex,ly loos money on it even self managing it. So I'm saying this to say I care about affordable housing. And I would really like to, if allow dodd this, to not have tenants just walking on a street to access their house. >> is this affordable housing or housing that is affordable? Those are two different... >> this is housing that would be affordable. >> so you are not going through rick or charlie's programs? >> well, conditionally if we get an approval we probably will. But right now I don't have a plan to take them. >> y'all more time to review? Do you have any questions? >> on this one, I'm going to -- I'm supportive of granting this variance. Primarily like I said, once again, the way idaho already acts, if we -- they can park in front of their place or they can park essentially around the corner in front of someone else's house and walk the alley to their house. And most of the people in this neighborhood prefer to have their cars close to their homes given the petty criminality that occurs due to not the neighborhood, but the transient visitors that come through and so I'm willing to support this application and disagree with the staff on this particular one as to the parking. >> any other comments? >> just out of curiosity, the rendering, the drawing you have with the parking, so this is what you kind of envision and I was curious, is there any, because you are possibly thinking about self manage, is there any concern for the people that move in and park there, that blind spot getting in and out because it seems like it MAY be a little stuff once they back in getting in and out of there that's my biggest hurdle and hangup I like the way it looks but access people getting in and out is one of my concerns as well for this project. >> real quick. >> MR. Pursley, could you describe or help me out with the blind spot issue. >> if the parking lot is going to sit in the back of the street and if he envisions someone backing in, and if we have folks walking up and down there alley, a narrow area, my whole concern is how easy would somebody be able to see someone walking on the street or another car coming in and could you tell, lack of better words, MAY not be considered a blind spot but the pedestrian piece about it. People coming in and out is my concern people walking on the street itself, I thought about that and I guess my thought was we do that on all our streets. Like at my house,when I'm pulling out, there is going to be people on the sidewalks so I think as long as you are not keeping shrubs there at the driveway, which by the way is one of my pet peeves that people You don't have that blind spot and so I think it's, to me, I don't think it's that much different than if it were a legal sidewalk right there at the driveway. That's just my thinking at least on that particular issue. any other questions or comments? Anyone else support the variance? >> I think I would be generally supportive as well. It's a low use street. It ain't great. It has a bunch of inherited problems and, you know, I put this in the category in the weighing of public safety, not a lot of public walking on this strip and I'm with MR. Gross, I think that issue will be there whether they're walking on a lightly used street or a sidewalk or whatever it happens to be there are is going to have to be personal accountability and falls in the category of not being able to reasonably use your property. lexington is short on houses and this is kind of the direction it's headed so you know, my own personal preference, design part, it would be nice to have a little more grass and I would at least put this pug bug in your ear, maybe you do some pervious parking for the grass coming up. It will look nicer, but other than that, I think I would be supportive as well. >> thank you. any other comments? If only two of us are going to support, let's make a motion and keep on moving. >> I don't disagree with you. But I will go back to my original statement. I think we are going to see a lot of these and I think we are going to have to adjust how we feel about these things and so would I support it in this condition and you these conditions with considerable reservation. But I think particularly situation, if you are going to have these kinds of housing for our citizens, we are going to have to make some adjustments. >> was that support or not support. >> I will support a motion to approve. >> so is a fourth inclined, if so, we will take -- I can get some findings from. >> is somebody going to make a motion to days prove or take a recess to have findings. >> I'm trying to figure that out. >> if somebody wants to make a motion to disapprove, somebody needs to make the motion and second it. There is one correction that needs to happen if you want a the request will not negatively impact. If somebody wants to make the motion to disapprove. >> I would support it, too. >> let's take a recess, do some findings. Thank you. >> would I like to take a five minute recess. Ask I will call for approval and MR. Moore, if you would not mind listening to the conditions , I don't think you will have an issue with those but we will need you to confirm that you are okay with those when they come. >> okay, sure. >> with respect to pln-boa-26-79 canopy property management request, I move to approve the request for including the reducing the required rear yard setback to four feet 6 inches,. Of the required front yard and reduce is the required setback from the side lot to 0 feet for the following reasons negatively impact the health, safety and welfare or create a nuisance for the residents because the surrounding area is made up of narrow lots constrained by railroad and substandard employing off street parking will allow the occupants to access the occupants or to park along the narrow street vawrnses are also justified by the special circumstances of the land land and will not unreasonably circumvent due to the unique nature with the following conditions. Construction shall be completed in accordance with the submitted application materials in site plan number 2, all necessary permits and approvals shall be obtained by the division of building inspection prior to completion of construction. So moved. >> you agree with those. >> yes. >> thank you. Motion by MR. Gross yes second by MR. Clark. Any further discussion. I would just like to second what MR. Walker said about the parking area. If you do have like maybe some sort of impervious sur surface so it's not all ceet crete I don't know what the city ordinances are regarding that but that sounds great. Please cast your vote. You have been aof proked. Thank you. Item number 4 on our conditional uses and variances heard docket, pln-boa-26-38 berea christian church I'm ryell browning with planning staff and this is berea christian church, a request to amend a conditional use permit for religious assemblyto construct a sanctuary and parking lot and reduce the setback from 50 feet to 15 feet in an agricultural rural zone at 3894 iron pike and berea road and it is located in council district 12. You can see the two parcels outluned in orange. It is located on the corner of iron pike works here and berea road here and the applicant is planning to consolidate those two lots. Here is the street view. Here is a view from berea road so this currently vacant lot will house much of the parking in the plan that is shown here is the original site plan applicant submitted for the JUNE 2026 hearing applicant requested a variance to reduce the setback from 50 to 15 feet and then staff previously recommended approval of a lesser variance to reduce the front yard setback from 50 to -- from 50 to 30 feet so it would not be differing greatly from the front yard setback of the existing structure. And then staff also recommended approval of the conditional use permit but it was subject to the conditions that no parking shall be permitted within the fema designated special flood hazard area or 100 year flood plain and no change in grade shall be permitted in the flood plain and only temporary parking in the flood plain so this is the flood plain itself, is this dash line and here is the 25-foot flood plain setback. And here is the revised site pla the applicant has submitted revised to depict a 30-foot setback. Originally shown to be 15 feet but they in line with staff's recommendation of a lesser variance, they're going to be within the 30 feet similar to the existing structure. And then the revise the site plan depicts a reduction in the total parking spaces from 110 to 97 total and a reduction in the proposed parking spaces located at least partially within the flood plain set back from 31 to about 12. Existing impervious area is 46,494 square feet and proposed impervious area is 56,900 an increase of 9525 square feet n. Addition to staff's concerns related to the flood plain, applicant redesigned the parking lot and reduced the amount of parking spaces within the flood plain area. You can see there is a drive aisle and there was parking previously in the area that has been removed but there is parking that is still located at least partially within the flood plain in a few different areas. Based on the changes, the proposal will have a reduced impact on the flood plain and reviewed for compliance with the division of engineering or flood plain appeals committee.& so staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit for the following reasons. The approval of the proposed modification to the existing conditional use shawed not adversely affect the subject or adjoining or nearby properties provided that all necessary permits understand approvals are made. The new building will be a space for the church to continue operations on seat for growing congregation sufficient to accommodate anticipated visitors to the church. Improvements will not change the hours of operation or the days of on site activity and b all necessary public services and facilities are or will be available for proposed use. This recommendation of approval is made subject to the following conditions. The property shall be developed and operated in accordance with the submitted application materials and revised site plan detailing the removal of all parking parking within the flayed plain. All necessary permits shall be obtainedded from the division of planning, inspection, building inspection, engineering and traffic jeshing prior to the construction and occupancy. Applicant shall obtain any necessary approvals from the fayette county board of health regarding capacity of the on site septic system to accommodate the facility expansion. 4: any new outdoor lighting shall comply with the requirements of the article 30. No change in grade shall be permitted within the flood plain. Water quality elements shall be installed within the parking area and stormwater management plan shall be implemented in accordance with the adopted engineering manual subject to the acceptance by the division of engineering. Staff recommendss aplofl of a lesser variance to reduce from 50 feet to 30 feet for the following reasons. >> granting the lesserrer variance shod not adversely affect the public health safety or welfare of the general vicinity nor alter the charkt of the general vicinity as it allows the proposed structure to be constructed outside of the flood plain and 25-foot flood plain setback of the proposed billing will not -- will have a front yard setback similar to the existing building. Granting the lesesser variance will not allow unreasonable sir circumvention of the requirements of the zoning ordinance. The presence of the flood plain and flood plain setback limits where proposed building can be located. Additionally the applicant has applied for necessary variance as soon as it was determined that they were needed prior to construction. >> the site shat be developed in accordance with the submitted applications materials and revise the seat plan and 2: all necessary permits shall be obtained from the division of building inspection and engineering prior to the construction. >> can we go back to conditions. If we are adding the additional impervious areas, in the flood plain area are they going to be able -- are they going to be able to comply with number 6: no change in grade shall be permitted within the floodplain and I guess the reason I'm asking, they go to the engineer and ask for some changes if they were to build infrastructure, the floodplain would essentially be moved by the engineers. Or, you know, I guess I'm just trying to figure out, you know, maybe they can explains plain but I guess -- it seems like if you are adding more impervious space, the water needs to go somewhere, but if you can't change any grades at all, then I guess I'm curious how all that works. >> generally that's a requirement of article 19 anyway because you are in the floodplain so you shouldn't be changing -- >> this isn't the buffer. This is the actual floodplain. >> in the floodplain no change in grade at all, right? And then the floodplain buffer is a 25-foot setback so the staff did, if you go back to the site plan, originally said, you know, no parking in the flood plane but -- in the floodplain but a drive aisle, we were generally okay with, but still not parking unless it's approved by the division of engineering for their special use permit and/or the flood plain appeals committee. And those levels of review do require quite a bit more engineering information to verify that there is not a change in the amount of water &-`going into the floodplain the grading of the floodplain. But generally article 19 prohibits fill and grading in the floodplain altogether. So they're going to have to figure out how to make that work. >> okay. Thank you very much. I was interested in the water quality elements. Qu ex -- can you explain what that is and what is required there? Number 7. >> would josh be able to come >> I'll ask the division of engineering to clear that up. >> I think MR. Clark is asking for examples of what that entails. >> I just want know what that means. What are those elements. >> josh, division of engineering. On projects like this, they are required to treat a certain volume of water and the stormwater manual has a list of approved methods to do that and up to the designs signers to choose one of the preapproved methods, design it in accordance with our requirements. It could be permeable pavers, extended detention, it could be impervious area disconnect. They have options. So when they submit their plans for us to review, they will have to submit those plans in there. We will compare it with the manual. >> the applicant has choices. >> correct. >> good, thank you, sir. >> any other questions? >> I have a question. It looks like when you drive by there, the church sits fairly close to the road. Do you know how far the entrance of the church to the road? Because they're going to put that building it looks like, if they get. >> I'm not sure if it shows on their plan how far it sets back. I'm not sure if they could answer. Are you asking like how long the driveway is? >> no, I was asking about the front of the church because the proposed sanctuary is closer to the road than that is. >> oh with the setback for the existing church? >> yes. >> let me see. >> from berea road, that lower dashed line is labeled as the 30-foot building line. So it follows where the property is a little bit at an angle closer to iron works pike. It does follow the property lines as it curves a little or changes as it comes along berea road. The new building and existing church on berea road should be generally in line or within maybe a foot or two of each other. >> okay. Yeah, I see where the 50-foot and then the 15-foot was but I was just curious. So that would be the 30 right there? >> yeah, this is their new site plan. >> yeah, so 50 is required. >> yeah. >> they asked for 15. But the existing building is right at 30 so the staff recommended that they push this new building back. And the two buildings could be in line, which they have done on that site plan. >> thank you. >> any other questions? Does the applicant have anything they would like to add before opposition comes up? Just remember, this has been recommended for approval. >> I understand. >> don't think have you to sell anything? >> I'll do my best. I will be quick. You asked very good questions and took up most of my presentation. If you could go back to -- not my powerpoint but if could you go back to staff's. i do want to address and clear up one thing that I hope doesn't cause confusion. Okay. Here it is. All right. could you raise your microphone up just a bit? There you go. >> thank you. I wanted to make sure that we don't have confusion over two of these conditions, which sort of look like they're in conflict, but I don't think they are because MS. Wade addressed that. It says property shall be developed in accordance with submitted applications and revised site plan detailing removal of all parking within the floodplain but it also says in number 5. No parking shall be permitted within the floodplain unless approved by the urban county engineer or the floodplain appeals committee. If you go back to our site plan, I I hope I'm cycling back correctly. >> keep pushing it. >> hold on. There you go. Now you can use the remote again. There should be showing some parking spaces in that drive aisle plus I believe out of the total of 97 spaces, there are actually eight spaces that are actually in the floodplain. That is out of 97 so I didn't want to be any confusion with that, based on what happens here today, we will be seeking special use permit to allow parking for the additional spaces. Now. >> could you use the pointer and point out where those spaces are because -- >> it's not showing on that. I'm going to get to that. If you could pull up my presentation. They're not showing on this one either. I will have MR. Barrett do it. >> okay, the top button. >> could you put your name on the record? >> tony barrett, barrett partners. Landscape architect that prepared the site plan. The parking that is in the floodplain are these spaces right here. And that space right there and maybe half of that space right there and the concern that we had is condition 1 -- >> can't hear you, tone agree condition 1 says no parking in the floodplain and submitted revised plan. Period. And condition 5 says no parking in the floodplain unless you get a special use permit or whatever that other provision was about the floodplain. And we just want to make sure that condition 1 and condition 5 are in sync and that we could park in the floodplain as we are proposing, provided we seek and are approved for a special use permit as outlined article 19 of the floodplain ordinance. >> dugs that make sense to staff that there MAY be a inconsistency? You understand you need a special permit and you just want the ability to seek the special permit. >> that's all we are asking and I think MS. Wade addressed it. She said as long as they get the special use permit. We just didn't want -- in the written presentation by staff, we just thought that one in -- 1 and 5 might be in conflict but I think we are operating under the assumption at this point that if we are approved for this, we still have to get a special use permit approved by engineering and we understand that and acknowledge that. We just didn't want any confusion on the conditions. >> so maybe we could clarify condition number 1 so that a revised site plan in accordance with whatever the floodplain appeals committee or division of engineering approves, so that kind of gives leeway of if they do approve something, just make sure the site plan you submit for your building permit matches, right. >> correct. We would agree with that. >> thank you. >> that makes sense to me I don't want to jump the gun but would traci and brittany, will you work on how to make that language so if we do have a motion to approve, we can go with it? Thank you. any other points you wanted to make? >> yes. Getting to it. We are aware that there is some opposition from the neighbors and I think they are the owners of the adjoining parcel. We are aware that we think they have a concern about possibly floodplain or stormwater runoff to their property. We have engaged MISS Katie beard from prime a engineering, it has been addressed and examined. There are some slides here that I'm going to let her answer those questions and she has some other information that she can share with all of you if you have questions about the floodplain. Katie. > Chair: state your name for the record, please. >> katie beard, prime A.E. All right. I'm sorry we are all struggling with this today. How do you move forward. >> go to the right. >> gotcha. >> go to the left. >> I'm sorry. Okay, I apologize for the delay. Again, katie beard. We've been contracted with this team to take a look at the impact of the floodplain as well as the stormwater management requirements for this site. Being a redevelopment site, we looked at is detention and water quality treatment required? Based on our analysis we determined that we could prove with the watershed study that detention is not required. A lot of times this is the case when you are low in a watershed avase jace ent to a river, a creek, you want to get your runoff out of the way before the peak hits in that creek, so just to summarize really quickly I will go through this quickly and keep it brief. Our watershed summary determined that the church accounts to 0.02% of the 20 square file watershed. Modeled flood depths for all of the design storms did not change. We are such a small percentage, that makes sense. We did not impact the flood elevation. And since there is no increase in the water surface elevation, detention is not required. We will, however, continue to treat the water quality of the runoff in accordance with the stormwater manual and those requirements. You heard a little bit from josh about the options. Something we looked at was doing a protected green space. And all of our discharge would pass through this area, sized to the correct size for the amount of runoff we have, which is about 14,000 square feet of the site. That is down in that floodplain area, would be treated as green space. Protected green space. That's our intent at this time. Of course we will do design plans and work through all of that with engineering to make sure we are in accordance with their manual and requirements. This is just a visual that very briefly puts a picture to what I just discussed. We have about a 2.89-acre site down here, the berea church is part of the overall watershed. It's a very minimal impact from our site to this overall watershed. And on the chart it just shows that our runoff peaks and it hits the peak or the curve. Overall cane run early, about an hour half and a half or more before the peak of the overall watershed. That's why we don't have an impact. We are not raising elevations or increasing free-throws. That's it in a nutshell to to briefly touch on your concerns grading can be maintained as we construct, if it is approved as we construct that parking area in the floodplain, the final grade of that surface will match the existing grade, so there will be no net change in that. That's the intent at this time. And as far as the water quality, that's like I discussed before. There are several options but the option we are leaning toward is the protected green space. So the that is it in a nutshell. If you guys have any other questions, I'm happy to get into any of that in more detail. >> I have one question. Is your results based on your final grading plan? >> yes. >> based on that final impervious number and the final grade. >> final confewers. >> yes. >> thank you. Any other questions? Any other points you would like to make? >> do you have any other questions for me? Hearing none, thank you. Opposition? Please come up and state your name and address. >> you have three minutes to present. >> good afternoon. My name is hazel combs and I am that neighbor right there, the person probably most impacted by the expansion of the church property. So my journey to today started when a stranger showed up in my backyard as I'm sitting at my kitchen table and with a measurement tool and started driving stakes into my propertied and I'm thinking well, what the heck is going on here? I could not find out what was going on. I called the church because they're my neighbors. They have been for 38 years. And I assumed they would let me know some someone was going to come on my property joined right there, but they did not. I proceeded to ask questions, ask questions, called, no answer, no answer, finally left a note on a car to please call me and let me know what was going on on my property and the adjacent property. I did get a call back and the explanation is yes, the church is going to expand. That's in the future you don't have to worry about it. That's long range planning. Much to my surprise, I didn't get a letter in the mail that there is a board of adjustment meeting happening on JUNE so from that point pored -- forward, from that point forward, I have been here five times. No one asked me if I was the opposition and had a chance to speak but here I am five months later the cane run watershed is a very fragile area. If you have never been there when the flood comes or when the creek rises, it's something to behold. Water is a very powerful source. i appreciate that there is a new rendering but this rendering does not define for me what is the area of that proposed parking, from my property line to concrete? What is the area? Nobody has said that it's not on this, every other drawing, were you 13 feet from my property line and now you don't tell me how far you are. Could you answer that for me. I still have 5 is seconds. I appreciate the additional green space because were you 13 feet from my property line, which is a little -- that felt a little close for comfort, even for the lord and a good neighbor. So bee do appreciate that; however, this entire building process has been somewhat of a secret. We the neighbors had to ask to have a meeting and there have been two meetings but this is the last rendering, but it shows -- it doesn't show me the information I need. So if could you do that for me we just publicly want to know what is the number close to me. And my husband back there, GOD bless. why don't you finish your presentation and then let him rebuttal. >> I'm up. we'll give you -- >> I just simply wanted to say this could have been a much easier process if we had been transparent and that transparency did not happen. And I wish that it had because, again, I have been a good neighbor for 38 years, and so this was very shocking and i felt -- well,unloved. >> all right. Now you MAY speak. >> let me make one com. You made a comment about no one had asked you to speak in opposition. >> yes. >> this has been postponed like four times. >> I know and I was here every one of those and you never asked if there was someone in open sitionz. there will be no opposition speakers unless we, you know, go over the case and treat it. I apologize for you having to come four or five times. But we really don't call for speakers until the appropriate time. And I will say again that the neighborhood association has written a letter to the two people involved and there is a lot of questions when it comes to building in the floodplain, spibd will top neighborhood and the cane run watershed, it's a very -- well, as I say, it's a fragile, protected area. So I ask that you consider that. thank you for your comments. >> the original proposal had the pavement within 13 feet of her property. In deference to her and after the first meeting, and then we made a presentation and I believe her husband showed up for the second meeting, there is an additional 42 feet space between where the parking is now and her property. So a total of 55 feet. It was originally proposed to be we listened to her concerns and those of her husband, we made the change to go from 13 to add an additional 42. We reduced the size of the additional building and originally it was 9800 and in order to accommodate MS. Combs , we reduced the building down to 7800. We did listen to her. She was heard. We made acompetitions based on what she said. She did come to the meetings I've come, as you remember, and asked for the four consecutive postponements. I did see her -- I'm not saying she is making up a story. I remember her being here once and I did tell her I said we are notifying staff in advance as much as we can that we are going to be requesting a postponement I also recall saying to her, if we are going to have another meeting before we actually are heard, because we want to address any other concerns from the neighbors and we have stuff to work out with staff there will not be a hearing on this until we have another neighborhood meeting. And I remember saying that and I think it was two months ago. We have tried to address her concerns and have stride to do our best to make sure that nobody from the spindle top area is coming here unnecessarily. That's really all can I say about it to address that. Any other questions for the applicant? any other discussions, questions? Based on all we've heard, could I have a motion, please? >> two things. Brittany has worked up that discrepancy item and the second thing is, I can't recall, it had been a while. Did you -- you are agreeable to the lesser as set forth in the staff report. >> the lesser variance? >> yes. Originally it was 15. Staff has recommended 30, to answer MS. Tucker's question, that's consistent with the existing church so we have a 30-foot building line setback for the expansion plus the existing church. So yes to your question. >> I just wanted to make sure. >> so the staff would suggest a modification to number 1. Where it currently reads and ends with the record are word revise the site plan. Delete everything after that and insert in accordance with a special use permit in granted pursuant to article 19. So again, deleting the part about detailing removal of parking. And instead have in accordance with a special use permit if granted pursuant to article 19. thank you. Does that meet your approval for condition change? >> we are in agreement with that, MR. CHAIRMAN. thank you. With that, I will move for approval of pln-boa-26-38 sorry. Witching pages conditional use permit in order to construct a sanctuary and parking lot in the ar zone on property located at 3894 iron works pikes and 267 berea road based upon -- sorry, this is going to be a mess. and staff's approval of a lesser variance to reduce front yard setback from 50 feet to 30 feet at the property of 3894 iron works pike and 2675 berea road. Based upon the staff's report based pop the testimony we heard subject to the conditions set forth in the staff report except for as to the conditional use permit, conditional condition number 1 has been modified as stated on the record and as to the variance conditions, those remain the same, so subject to those conditions. So moved. Sorry. It was a mess but I think I got everything. Okay, thank you. >> I'll second, MR. Chair. motion by MR. Gross, second by MR. Clark, any further discussion? Please cast your vote. Thank you. You have been approved it has been a long time, but finally got it. >> very good. Thank you all. next item on the conditional uses and variance heard docket pln-boa-26-82. Compass capital retail partners llc. This has been recommended by staff for disapproval so they will present first. This is pln-boa-26-82, compass capital retail partners requested a conditional use permit for a drive-thru facility in a commercial center b-6p zone on property located at 3130 pim company parkway. Pimlico parkway and man o' war battlefield here. And then here is a street view of the subject property from the parking lot. So the business in question requesting the drive-thru facility is located higher, and the proposed drive-thru would be located to the left of the building from this photo so it would be in this area. And their site plan which I will show in a moment shows their tacking and one of the five stacking spaces would be locate add round here with the stop line so that would show separated stacking. One vehicle would be here and the remainder would be along this side of the building and then here is a closer view of the property and here is where the drive-thru facility would be located you can see an existing drive-thru that serves this business and has a window here so the two lanes for each drive-thru would be flowing in the same directions. So one going this way and one here. And located on this structure so that means that the window would be serving the passenger side door of any vehicles that were using the drive-thru. And then here is a view of the property, the vehicles would be traveling towards this direction and you can see where the existing drive-thru is located right there and then there are also some vehicles parked behind this neighboring building because there is a car center located in the neighboring structure so there are some vehicles that are parked in this lane that the vehicles in both drive-thrus would be exiting towards the rear of the buildings and then would potentially be able to drive in either direction. So here is the site plan for the property here is the liquor store and the drive-thru and you can see one vehicle is stacked in this location behind a stop line with the parking in the surrounding area. Applicant did indicate and in their justification terse that the proposed hours of operation for retail use would be monday through thursday 10 A.M. To 11 pp, friday and saturday 10 to 12 and sunday 1-9 and they expect anywhere to be from five to 30 customers each day using the facility staff has concerns regarding the proximity of the existing drive through facility to the proposed facility and how it might negatively affect the health, safety and welfare of the orientation of the drive-thru windows requiring the vehicles to be served through the passenger side and proposed, the vehicles exit the drive-thru lanes to the rear of the building: I can go back and show that. They would be exiting in this lane here behind both of the structures and in that area, there is limited visibilty and turn radius: and then additionally while the site plan depicts stacking for five vehicles not including the space located at the window, staff has concerns locating the one stacking spot behind a stop line could encourage vehicles to block the internal circulation of the site when there are vehicles trying to drive-thru this area and then a car might stop here but want to pull through into the drive-thru potentially blocking traffic that is trying to move through the shopping center. So staff is recommending disapproval for the following reasons. The proposed drive-thru facility will adversely affect the surrounding properties as the request places a portion of the stacking area for the proposed drive-thru behind a stop line encouraging vehicles to pull forward in the direction of the order point after stoppinging and blocking circulation within the shopping center. B: proposed drive-thru will negatively affect the public health safety and welfare as the drive-thru facility to the proposed drive influence facilities creates the need for vehicles to access from the passenger side and creates unsafe turning condition as vehicles excite the drive-thru lanes and c, the disapproval of the variance will not create an unnecessary hardship for the applicant as retail and services uses have successfully operated within the unit without a drive-thru facility and with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> I got just one question. A couple questions. So from the recommendation, I guess the big issue is probably the stacking that could occur from having that drive-thru and also what I didn't realize you pointed out, they would be on the passenger satisfied when they pull in to get their goods and since there are double drive-thru lanes exiting one way would be a hazard for two cars possibly. >> >> those were the main concerns and I don't believe it necessarily dictates that they have to drive in one direction behind the building either so there could potentially be traffic going in both directions behind the building while the two aisles going in the same direction are trying to turn into the traffic. >> thank you. >> you are welcome. >> any other questions. Is that confusing sufficient? >> but there is only one pickup window on the one building? None on the other building. >> there is one existing pickup window on this structure which isn't part of the request and then this building is requesting to have the drive-thru facility and having a window there. >> where is the pickup window for the other building? >> so it's here. With this awning. There is currently a drive-thru facility that locates here and then the applicant is wanting to have a facility approved located here and the vehicles would be traveling the same direction with the window located on this side of the building thank you. Applicant please come forward. Hearing the staff comments, could you present your case and please state your name for the record. >> good afternoon. Alex mulhal, counsel for the applicant and with me, brad bow as who prepared the site plan and the tenant who operates the liquor store just to start off, I did have a few minor points of clarification. So if we can -- which button do I hold to focus it? The stack I believe you can see here, this stack is further up further up in the parking lot area so it is not initially from the street view, it's a bit confusing. There are two curb cuts here. So it is ail little bit further And second minor clarification is the pickup window that we're requesting is at the rear of the building. It's not at the same level. This is the window for the neighboring drive-thru facility. The window we would like to put in is at the back of the facility to increase the area where week stack the vehicles so just to make sure we just a few minor points so in reviewing staff's points, it's a valid discussion. I will note that this proposal was put together with both input from other tenants in the shopping center and as well as fayette county traffic engineering. We had david, MR. Boaz correspond with him. He reviewed this plan, confirmed there were no issues, in his perspective with any traffic both in front of and to the rear of the building and speaking with MR. Moshny he has explained to me from his experience driving around the building he operates, there is actually not it's not a blind corner and also neither of the drive-thru uses or proposed use nor the use on the other side to the left are quick service operations I know that there is discussion about the length of the stack and having that car down at the stop line we don't anticipate this use will ever generate, not never, it is unlikely that that will be a common occurrence to general race the amount of traffic watley we will constantly have issues with the car at the stop line. And if you have driven by drive-thrus like this, there is not like a coffee shop or Mcdonald's that's going to have constant regular volume traffic backed out to the street and again that was confirmed to us with lexington traffic. They agreed with that analysis. The other point about the passenger side window, we were unable to find anything in the ordinances or otherwise that provides that a passenger side drive-thru is adverse to public safety. If any of you have been to rallies, you know that is a common -- they serve on both passenger and drive-thru windows. We think that is not an issue for the public health or safety. It is an established use in lexington and I think that based on all these recommendations I feel like we can and adequately address any other questions or points that are made. But MR. Bow boas, if you have anything else you want to add. >> brad boaz with cmw. Everything you see in red on the proposed plan is what is changing, the traffic flow as it stands today is what it looks like on the plan, it is two lanes of traffic driving in that direction. one is for the drive-thru for the store on the left. The other is a passenger lane. Previously this was a dentist office so it has changed from an office use to more retail use and as we alluded to, the good will, talking to good will because we looked at multiple options stacking through the rear access road and coming through the opposite direction and both lanes are moving counter to what being on the right side of the road, we looked at multiple options and talked to goodwill and other tenants and felt this was the best option we could present to you all ace drive-thru so take any questions. >> any questions for the applicant? Hearing none, could I have a motion well, there has been slated for disapproval. >> was there anyone in the audience here today? Was there someone? The audience here today to speak about it. >> I did not ask. Is there any opposition here today? Hearing none, any further discussion. >> would I like to ask traffic engineering to address the assertion that they are okay with this. That's not the conversations we've previously had with their staff. >> there were multiple iterations submitted, none of which were deemed the safest. The conversation that revolved around this design is there s something to to prohibit it but that doesn't mean. >> so in your opinion, is -- is picking up on the passenger side, is that a safe way to operate? >> I don't believe so. I think what is going to -- I'm not aware of another drive-thru in lexington that has a driver reach ago cross the passenger side to go the to the window. So I have a feeling that what will happen is you will have people coming in the wrong way because they think I'm supposed to go through a drive-thru window on the driver side so you are going to have cars as MR. Boaz's testimony was, this is already the flow of traffic and so now I'm going to confuse drivers with thinking that my drive-thru window is going to be on my driver side and have multiple conflicting points, I just increased the conflicting points. So I think you are creating unsafe condition and exacerbating that and there was some of the drawings up there. there was a new drive-thru that was done just on the other end of the building adjacent as design change were made to ensure the safety of it and those safety parameters did not change just because we changed location the stack and things like that. Making sure that it's safe were still in play and I think the conversation revolved around I don't their there is anything to prohibit necessarily delivering out the passenger window but that's when people leave the car in park and hit the accelerator or, come up to the window in the wrong direction so multiple issues with safety and just with the design. >> so this neighborhood, too, also seems to be kind of a lot more pedestrian friendly than other neighborhoods would that prohibit the safety aspect of people walking. >> absolutely. That was some of the design parameters that we encouraged at the other location when the drive-thru window was put in. There is an island and some different nah muserses -- maneuvers that shorten the pedestrian across. This is not changing anything other than just adding a window and hoping the cars go the correct way there is no additional proposed traffic calming, pedestrian, you know, refuge islands or anything that would encourage the safety that is being proposed here. And so with that in mind, that's why we recommend -- the staff recommended disapproval. any other questions for traffic? Thank you. Is there anything you would like to say differently based on what traffic presented? >> sure. And amolgs, -- apologies, I didn't get your name. I'm representing the conversations I know we've had with traffic in terms of there were no objections and did not advice in our discussions there would be any issue. I think those are valid concerns raised by traffic. I would say they're pretty easily mitigated, particularly coming in the wrong window, as in driving in the wrong lane for the window. Simple striping and signage will easily mitigate that. This is not necessarily a very high volume traffic area in terms of what this use is. And what it will be used for this is not a high volume of cars coming in here, and in terms of, you know, pedestrian safety, again, that is a drive-thru area that is used by the other tenants of the shopping center including the mine meineke car care. There have not been going issues with pedestrian traffic. We don't -- I don't see that that is necessarily a high concern that pedestrian traffic will be adversely affected. Pedestrians will not be endangered by creating this drive-thru lane. So... Any other questions for the applicant? >> would I like to comment that simply that no questions, I just have to agree with the staff. It's a very awkward plan and I think it really does not fit with this, in this particular location. And I know what you are trying to do and I understand. I appreciate that. But it seems very awkward to me and passenger side really does bother me A.L. And the particular location and traffic involved here, it's probably in the wrong place. Just my opinion. any other discussion? Questions for the applicant? Could I have a motion, please? >> MR. Chair, I move to uphold the staff's recommendation of disapproval of compass capital real at this partners llc's request for conditional use permit for drive-thru facility in a commercial center zone on property located at 3130 pimlico parkway based on material testimony offered here today. motion from MR. Walker. Could I have a second? >> second. second from MRS. Tucker. Any further discussion? Please cast vor lease cast your vote. It has been disapproved. Thank you. Last item on our conditional uses and variances heard docket pln-boa-26-83, tearica cobb. >> earlier in the meeting I spoke with the objectors in this case and answered their questions and they've decided to withdraw their opposition. So this can be done without a hearing if there are other other objectors present. >> thank you, MR. Crum. no objections. >> MR. Chair, I move approval of pln-boa-26-83, tearica cobb. >> time out. Let's hold it. Let's have the applicant up first and then they can agree to the conditions and then we are ready to rock & roll. would the applicant please step up? State your name for the record, please. >> tearica cobb. you can move the microphone down if it's convenient. Staff has recommended approval of this application based on four conditions have you read those? >> yes, sir. are you in agreement with those? >> yes, sir. >> is there any questions or comments from the board for the applicant? >> MR. Clark, take it away. I move for approval pln-boa-26-83 request for conditional use permit for home addressed business, barber shop in a single-family residential zone on property located at 933 de porres avenue based on the staff's recommendation and the four conditions listed. >> second. motion from MR. Clark, second from MR. Pursley. Any further discussion? Please cast your vote. Thank you. You have been approved. >> thank you. >> thank you all. >> last item on our regular agenda is our str applications expedited docket. Pln-boa-26-80 hg homes of kentucky llc. Applicant please step forward. >> hello, gatewood arnold of H.G. Homes. >> this application has been recommended for approval by the staff, baded on four conditions. Have you read those conditions? >> yes, I have read all four conditions. >> you are in agreement with those? >> yes, sir, I'm in agreement with all of them. any further questions for the applicant is this could I have a motion please. >> you have two letters of opposition. you also have this up for a long-term rental right now. >> I'm sorry, what was the question? >> do you have this up for a long-term rental right now on zillow? >> well, we MAY have that. I don't know at the moment we are looking to change it to a short-term rental and then you have a couple letters, too, of opposition. >> I is I was not aware of that. >> do you own the townhouses on either side. >> we own several townhomes around that. The one actually next door adjacent, no. We do not own. One the other side is our actual leasing office that we also own. >> okay, thank you. any other questions for the applicant? Any further discussion? Could I have a motion, please? >> I'll make a motion to approve pln-boa-26-0080 H.G. Homes of kentucky llc request for a conditional use permit for unhosted short-term rental on the property located at 3573 laredo drive along with the four conditions outlined by staff. >> I have a motion from MR. Pursley, second? >> second. second from MR. Walker. Any further discussion? Please cast your vote. You have been approved. >> thank you very much. thanks for your patience. Now we have a board item. >> before we get started chair, i believe the packet you had only has the staff reports but we emailed you the entire packet so I'm going to hand that out just so you can follow along with MS. Durkes presentation and I believe patty also gave you the powerpoint presentation from the department of law from two months ago. So have you that at your desk as sell. the board now will entertain, we have three reasonable accommodation requests. Take these one at a time after a presentation by staff. >> good afternoon. Your first reasonable accommodation request today is from perfect imperfections kentucky. This is an appeal for a zoning compliance permit seeking an accommodation under the federal fair housing act in order to operate a recovery residence for up to 12 individuals in the single-family r-1c zone at 1006 gains-way drive in council district 8. You can see on the powerpoint, the subject property is located on gainsway drive. This is gainesway's intersection with tates creek road. The subject property is 15,903 square feet in size the dwelling unit is a single-family residents, 12496 square feet in size. Applicant has indicated there are six bedrooms and three full bedrooms in this resident -- bathrooms. The applicant has kuwaited there are two to four driveway spaces plus available off street parking and they're asking for an accommodation of up to 12 residents. As MR. Cravens explained in his presentation in AUGUST, the staff will not be making a recommendation on these requests. We are just providing information. So that's the extent of the staff's presentation. I would be happy to answer any questions. >> could you repeat the parking situation? >> the applicant indicated there are two to four spaces in the driveway plus available off street parking. >> any other questions is this. >> do we know how many people are there right now? Does it hold eight or -- >> I'm not sure if they're operating currently or not. That would be a question for the applicant. >> do you know how long they will be housed for? Like is it a big turnover rate over several months or will they be there a long time? Is it a yon-year, 45-day? >> I'm not sure but I'm sure the appellant can answer that in their presentation. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you. applicant please step >> good afternoon, nathan thomas. >> good afternoon, croeta roberts, C.E.O. Of perfect imperfections. >> we did put in the reasonable accommodation request for -- it's actually two driveways with a total of four spots in each driveway. that's one thing. The P.D.A. Doesn't state it's a six bedroom home which I have had trouble getting hold of the owner to reshow exactly how many bedrooms or sign a statement. I do have pictures and a drawing of the layout in the home. Currently it is operating and currently we have eight in the house we are a long-term program so it is not a huge revolving door. Also at that location, including a couple of other ones that we have, we generally place people that have a little more of an established baseline for their housing, their recovery, and so on and so forth. So it is not just a burch of people quick in and out when it comes to that portion of things. >> what is your average stay? >> I'm sorry? >> what is your average stay. >> average lends of stay. There is multiple locations right? So average is probably three to four months. Average, yes, sir. I have put a few things in here. Dint realize how many people were up here today so I didn't make enough copies but I put a few things in there that shows our intake process as far as programming goes, which states that a licensed clinician based upon standard also diagnoses people with either mental health issues or with substance use issues, which would fall into the fair housing act, of course. And then as well as that, we have a strenuous process as to when the people go into the house. We go background checks as far as you know, sex offender checks. We don't allow those types of cases currently in any of our locations. We also review over -- you know, sorry, multiple things. This is the first time I've stood up in front of so many people like this in this type of manner so I will say this. One thing we really do, we thrive to make an impact like we do this thing called good neighbor policy. We really just jump started it this year. It's a thing, an initiative where we go out and do service work on a regular basis. That's something we promote in the neighborhoods and we are actually looking to do more of that this year coming up that's gruft one thing I want to say. We are not just here to flop in a house. You know. Like we have seen happen so many times. >> and I will say that we are objects have youly a licensed aode, multi-specialty 66. We are one of the few licensed agencies in the state. Or programs in the state I should say specifically in the city of lexington that we do accept couples and a lot of our couples are married. And we do believe that it is okay for them to recover together. We have been very successful in that. I believe we were one of the first legally authorized programs to begin accepting couples. We have been very successful with our couples. We're selective in the locations that we choose. I always say if I wouldn't live there, I'm not going to place my clients there. My mother was the very first graduate of my program six years ago. So she is going on six years clean and sober. Super proud of her. But again, that house, this one here specifically is six bedrooms. Huge bedrooms so, yes,... >> is there a minimum square footage for each? >> so I know that the city standard and the nara standard is 50 per person but I know each of these bedrooms are bigger than 100 square feet. >> is that 50 square feet for the bedroom or entire house? >> it's 50 square feet per person per bedroom. >> okay. >> so we are completely nar and krhn certified for all of our locations in the city. And this particular location, the master bedroom is 210 care feet. The next bedroom is 175, the next bedroom is 148. And 126, 135 and 177. Those are all the different square footages for each bedroom. Which they also have plenty of storage space for either by closet, dressers along with we have accommodated just in case we go over that number for extra storage for cabinetry. An extra refrigerator in the kitchen and deep freezer that would also help -- those are things to make sure they have plenty of space to store their belongings and all their food. >> how many employees will you have along with the residents? >> our ratio is one to three or one to four. >> I was wondering about parking, too. >> there is not a live-in staff member but there is a house manager which is a more senior or completed participant of the program. That has shown the ability to take the initiative, to progress in not only work skills, life skills, but also recovery skills at the same time and they do live on site. Every one of our locations. >> so how many other employee dozen have you that come and go? Like the most at one time that would have vehicles? >> probably. And they could do off street parking. Generally most -- we don't do a lot -- most things we work on in the house is recovery capital style things woo.Y don't do any type of programming or anything of that nature it's a living space. The house manager right now would be a one to four ratio because there are two house managers that live in that location because generally it's a couples location so it's great to have a male and female, of course. And then one of us staff, we have four house leads that do a rotation of when we are on call, when we stop by to check on things, to make sure that everything is running the way it's supposed to run. >> do you have like a karfa accreditation. >> not yet, no. We have not got there yet but we are nar or krhn. It used to be kir. We do have the certificates for those. >> and I should say we are also D.O.C. Approved as well. >> thank you. >> so if we approve the increase from 8 to 12, how many live-in supervisors would you have there? >> the number would remain the same. Because the way that the house is set up, that number would remain the same. >> it would just turn into a one to six. Generally speaking, it stays at -- the house has been in operation for years. >> that was my next question. When did you first establish this. >> perfect imperfections we opened our doors AUGUST 4, 2020.& I believe that was our third location and I want to say we got that location in '21, 2021. >> any incidents with your neighbors or anything? >> no, we have an open records -- we requested the open records. There has not been any incidents filed since 2019 at that location specifically. >> and I would say this I was contacted by on facebook by a neighbor there was another sober living program and I won't name them, but they're no longer existing, I believe, thank GOD, but this neighbor thought that they were a part of my program. And so I told him, give me the address. You know, I haven't heard anything of this going on. We have cameras at our locations. I didn't see anything going on. And then he apologized. He said it was the wrong house. I assumed it was you guys but it was not. But no, so I am not privy to any citations since we have been there since 2021, the end of >> I think we are expected to ask two questions. Number 1: why is the increase necessary and is the uncrease reasonable? So it would be good if you could answer that question. That's the materials we have been given necessary and reasonable. >> sure. So, I feel it's necessitieded because as nathan suggested, right now we have over 80 clients. The majority of our housing is completely for. We are very selective on who we put in these style houses. Again, these are ones that we have had for quite sometime. We like to glyph these to our poo -- we like to give these to our people that come in that have more sober time because they're very nice homes. And why is it feasible? It is feasible because one of the bedrooms we turned into a storage area, just -- we just have so much extra room. It's a lot of extra room there. We have two sets of washers and dryers upstairs and downstairs, we've got two full with three full sized bathrooms. And again we have cameras in all of our common areas. house managers on site. I live not too far from the location myself so that would be my answer to that. >> just to be clear, his question is why is it reasonable, not feasible. Not say that your answers were necessarily off, but if you have anything else you want to add in light of that? >> sure. >> so it's reasonable because it is helping us to help other people people who would otherwise be on the street homeless, right? To haveto return to their... (Inaudible) Or not have the community that is so needed in recovery. That is a big part of why even my mom, I believe, is so successful is because she continues to work in recovery, she continues to surround herself with like-minded people in the recovery community. And that's what it's about. Is building a community so that you have the support, whether we are whether perfect imperfections is open or not, you have the support in or homes and we give you the tools you need when you are ready to graduate our program and get your own place. >> is there a backlog of residents looking to be placed? >> in recovery homes. >> yes, currently with the growing number of places shutting down, actually, let's be honest, due to many numerous different reasons and just unhoused population in general who generally suffer from smi, severe mental illness or sud, substance use disorder, the need is huge. We have 176 people on our waiting list currently looking for not only programming but housing as well. Generally speaking it goes, it fluctuates, let's say, there iter of them probably won't answer the phone, right? So in general, census, we are about 130 to 145 people on backlog currently. And we have held off on bringing anymore in of course until we had an opportunity to speak with you guys. >> that answers the necessary. >> very necessary. Very. >> do you take people in who are already sober? And my question is so if they have been in jail for a certain amount of time or 30-day house, they're sober and I know a lot of places won't take them unless they drug test positive. In our policies and procedures, this-of, they must be fully detoxed. Granted thc can linger longer but they are required and in our policies and procedures and something we stand strictly on, they must be detoxed from any kind of substance. We would be the place that they're coming out of jail, and they want to be in a program -- (Inaudible) Mental health is generally stabilization when it comes to that situation. Same concept for both. yes, ma'am. >> >> we are definitely one of the programs that want to you go relapse just to get into our center I hear people say that coming into our program and it makes me want to vomit. So, no, you do not have to be, to have a dirty drug screen to be entered into our program. >> and I just want to add though, I'm also a graduate of the program. I came through in '21. I'm a person in long-term recovery now and one thing I can say about being in the program -- and I have another statement from a past participant, too. Is this: one thing that I learned in the recovery housing world itself is that helps create a certain sense of stability. I'm a lead now and I get to help people learn stability. I wake up every day and make my bed and get ready to go to work do the things that -- (Inaudible) We treat all of our people as fairly as possible. >> congratulations to your sobriety. Good job. any further questions? No further discussions (Inaudible). >> we might want to take a short recess. If there are anymore questions, ask them, if not, maybe you need to tell me where you all are at with this and you can close the discussion, I suppose and develop the consensus and we can take a recess to draft those findings. >> they have two of these. Would we be doing both of those? Or all three or just one? >> you would need to do them separately, although I can't imagine if you wanted to -- so would you need to do two motions. If they're already up there, if you want to hear from staff on the other, I imagine the information will be very familiar because the same applicant. You can go ahead and do that. That is up to you. >> I was curious about that. Thank you. >> if you all have any presentation on versailles road one. >> same thing. It is about it pva, a six bedroom three full bath I. Has a little apartment on the back side I did not realize I could bring like a powerpoint wore I would have done that I'm a total tech nerd and love to do things like that. I have documentation in the folder. I did not print enough but you are more than welcome to. If you wanted to look at them or whatever, but it is technically a single-family dwelling, the versailles road house is and it is already parked as miff miff -- marked at six bedrooms. You know, there is really nothing changing... (Audio is going in and out) >> possibly up to 10 people in the location. The reason I say 10 is because there is an apartment that is completely separate that has its own dwelling spaces as far as living room, bathroom, that was actually put in by the owner, not by us. >> so on the versailles road, you are just asking from 8 to >> because -- well, the apartment is separate. so I don't know if I need to request two more, but it's a separate section of the house. >> it's a totally separate entrance even to the house. >> I just want to point out, staff also habit presented the information for the property at versailles road so that might help some of those questions. Because that's just gainesway up there. >> just out of curiosity, do we know how many people currently reside at the versailles road location? >> currently eight people. We haven't upped how many people >> there is three bedrooms, is that incorrect? >> that's not the right one. >> that's 1006 gainesway. There should be another document for the application that should be for 1603 versailles road. >> can we have stephanie present that information to you? This one is just about gainesway For the next request, this is from perfect imperfections located at 1603 versailles road in an r-1c zone in council district 11. Orient you to the property. Located there on versailles road between woodford drive and garrett avenue. It's a single-family residence. This pros is 14,175 square feet. It is a single-family residence, pva listed the square footage the 2509. I did look at the pva listing for this and it showed three bedrooms, the appel act has -- the appellant has said six. The appellant information said three full bathrooms on the property. six driveway spaces we had made an assumption, staff had, that you were requesting 12 individuals for this location but if that request is 10, then the appellant can clarify that. Any questions for staff. >> the reason I didn't request 12 on that, there is a separate apartment. The pva that I printed off that I saw states that it is a six bedroom home and I believe they incorporated -- yes. >> let me ask the question this way. Are you wanting to have up to 12 for this entire address whether it's two in one and 10 in the other? >> to include the apartment that is behind it, yes. >> and it's the same address to your knowledge. >> we have not been told it's not. >> so you want 12 for the entire parcel. That's what matters. Y'all can go ahead with your versailles road is how many people? We are asking for how many people. >> 12. >> 12. >> we only asked for 10 because the apartment has the backside and I can give you the square footage of those bedrooms as well. For the main bedroom, it's 173 square feet, 172 square feet, 114 slightly smaller room which is currently not occupied. 128 square feet and 124 and it is in good standing with nar and khrad. It would be the same setup, one to four ratio it's a house that's a fairly established house. Plenty of parking. The bus stop is literally across the street from the house which makes it accessible for people that do not have vehicles but everything else would be the exact same as the presentation that we did for the 10 on 6 gainesway drive. And the house all the time, being able to go out signed enjoy the outdoors and get the fresh air and sunshine after they come from programming or before they again go in. And this is another location would I live, no questions asked. I believe we have been there. This one we go the this one after our gainesway house. So I believe this one was -- yes, we have been there about two years at the versailles road location. >> are your backyards in these locations fenced? >> yes. >> fully. >> they both actually have privacy fences surrounding them any further questions of the applicants? Brittany, should we take a short break. >> that's fine. I might need some direction on where the board is going with this. So if you want to close the hearing and then have some discussion amongst yourself, that would help and then we would definitely need a break. It is the first one we have done like this so a recess is going >> do we need to do that? >> yes. >> okay. >> can we do the third one first or should we -- >> this is a different one. >> I'm sorry, are you asking a question? >> I was just asking should we hear the third one before we take a break or just we need to talk about these two first? >> well, it's a separated application so it might make sense to ache a break now and once I hear where you guys are going with it again, are you going to approve this request or not, then we can get to the last applicant. That's what I would suggest. do you recommend going into closed session for discussion? >> no, I'm recommending if have you discussion amongst yourself, so you can build a consensus on whether you are going to approve this request or not do, that now like you would nag else and then we can take a recess. >> we'll take a short recess. We have questions and the board can feel free to step in if you wanted. If you were looking for up to 12 in each property addresses and you had a ratio, if you got 12, 1 to 6 for the housing managers and those in recovery, is that correct? >> correct. >> so when you have an occupancy of up to 12, that's going to be inclusion inclusive of the housing managers. >> correct. >> okay, so when you say one to six, you don't mean 14. >> I apologize about that. >> that's the number we were not thinking -- hive making sure you understood that. >> 12 total. >> could I have a motion, please. >> MR. Chair, I make a motion with respect to ra-26-01 perfect imperfections kentucky I move to aren't move at peel for a zoning compliance permit that 1006 gainesway drive as a reasonable accommodation and you the fair housing act for the following reasons: requested accommodation is made by or on behalf of disabled persons protected by the fair housing act. The applicant testified they provide housing for in recovery and must be fully detoxed from any substance before they provide housing. The asked accommodation is necessary because 1: demand for safe recovery housing frequently exceeds available beds with 176 waitlisted clients and all available housing full. The applicant routinely receives referrals for individuals who have completed treatment and cannot return to their previous environments. 3: patients who are unable to obtain safe, drug free housing upon discharge risk relapse overdose, homelessness, vim timization and reincarceration. Number 4. Thus granting occupancy above 8 will enable the applicant to serve additional individuals who would otherwise face substantial barriers to obtaining safe, recovery oriented housing. Number 3. Requested accommodation is reasonable because 1: the applicant has been operating in this location since AUGUST of 2020 and so authorizing an increase in occupancy should not have a significant impact as the intensity of the use in this area. 2: the applicant testified that the average length of stay for ac pabts is three to four months. 3: the applicant testified that they have adequate personal space of at least 50 square feet per person per bedroom and the property to satisfy recovery housing standards. Number 4: the applicant testified that they have adequate storage for food and personal items for each occupant. 5: the applicant testified that they provide housing for couples in recovery and increasing occupancy allows them to accommodate couples so they can recovery together -- recover together 6. The ratio to house numbers is 1 to 4 and only the house managers will park off street. Occupants have limited need for parking and have adequate parking on street. 7: recovery housing provides recovering addicts and atmosphere where the addicts have not abused substances and have in-person support to avoid relapse. So moved. >> I have a motion by MR. Clark. Do I have a second? >> second. >> second from MR. Pursley. Any further discussion? Please cast your vote. you have been voted for approval. With respect to ra 26-2 perfect imperfections kentucky, I move to approve at peel for zoning compliance permit to operate as recovery residence for up to 12 individuals at 1603 versailles road as a reasonable accommodation under the fair housing act for the following reasons. The applicant testified that they provide housing for those in recovery and they must be fully detoxed from any kind of substance before they provide housing the requested accommodation is necessary because ix seedss available beds with 176 waitlisted clients and all housing full. Applicant routinely receives referrals for people who have completed treatment but cannot return to their previous environments. And patients are able to obtain safe housing and number 4, thus granting occupancy above 8 will enable the applicant to serve additional individuals in a safe recovery oriented housing. Requested accommodation is reasonable. The applicant has been operating in this location since 2022. So authorizing increasing occupancy should not have a significant impact on the intensity of the use in this area. 2: the applicant testified average length of stay for occupants is three to four months. The applicant testified that they have adequate personal space of at least 50 square feet per person per bedroom and the property to safe recovery housing standards. 4: applicant testified that they have adequate storage for food and personal items for each occupant. The applicant also testified that they provide housing for couples in recovery and increasing occupancy allows them to accommodate couples so they can recover together. 6: ratio of house managers is 1-4 and only the house managers will park off street. Occupants have limited need for parking and have adequate parking on street. 7: recovery housing provides recovering addicts an atmosphere where the applicants have never abused substances and they have in-person support provided to avoid relapse. So moved. >> I have a motion from MR. Clark. Do I have a second? >> second. Second from MR. Pursley. Any further discussion? >> thank you guys. Thank you. You have been approved. We appreciate what you all are doing. Our next case is ra-26-3, begin again lexington. Presentation by staff. >> your third reasonable accommodation request today is a request to operate a recovery residence up to 10 individuals in the planned neighborhood residential r-3 zone at 276 coriander lane in council district 6. Subject property located in the patchen wilkes subdivision. 276 coriander lane is here. This is wilkes way, executive drive. If you come down to the south executive drive intersects with winchester road to the south. Subject property is located here. This property is 4398 feet in size. Single-family residence dwelling unit is 2062 square feet. Three bedrooms. The number of bathrooms was not provided by the appellant. The appellant's information did indicate that there are eight parking spaces and they are seeking an accommodation for up to 10 residents. I would be happy to answer in I questions. >> applicant please come forward. >> moo I name is michelle kunic, the owner of begin again counseling here in lexington. So to clarify we have two and a half bathrooms on property. We do meet all of the nar regulations for spacing for 10 people. The eight parking spaces we have two and a half car garage parking and then we have two full driveway parking spots and then we have on street parking. So just to clarify all of that information individuals recovering from alcohol and substance use disorders are recognized as persons with disabilities under the fair housing act when they're not currently engaging in the use of illegal substances. The government makes reasonable accommodations in rules and policies and practices when accommodations are necessary to afford persons with disability equal opportunity to use and enjoy housing. Our request is both reasonable and necessary. Sober living homes are not residential dwellings but we are a supportive recovery environment that provides pair accountability, structure and stability. Increasing the occupancy limit from 8 to 10 will preserve the residential character of the home. Specifically allowing 10 residents would first improve housing accessibility as you have already heard. There is not enough housing for people in recovery. Would expand the available of available housing from unstable living conditions reducing the waitlist for individuals seeking safe and supportive housing during recovery. It would also promote successful recovery outcomes. There has been research that consistently shows that peer support in recovery oriented housing significantly improves long-term sobriety employment and community reintegration. A larger recovery community within the home strengthens the accountability and social& support networks. Finally maintains neighborhood compatibility. Occupancy increase from eight to 10 residents does not substantially increase traffic noise or demand for municipal services. And residents of our home live as a family like household sharing common areas and responsibilities as other residential households do. The increase from eight to 10 does not alter the residential nature of the home and can be safely accommodated by maintaining the same stands adder in place now. Residents of our homes are individuals, committed to maintain is sobriety, obtaining employment, rebuilding family relationships and becoming productive members of the society. Many residents work locally volunteer within the community, attend community events and contribute to the local economy through employment and consumer spending. Allowing two additional residents in this home would have several positive local impacts. It would increase at veilbility of safe, affordable recover recovery housing without requiring new construction or increased use of public resources. Reduce homelessness and housing instability of members in recovery and reduce relapse and public services. Support workforce participation by providing stable housing for individuals employed or seeking employment and help address the growing need for recovery oriented housing while maintaining neighborhood character. By allowing 10 residents rather than eight, the city can expand housing opportunities for individuals protected unthe fair housing act while proposing public health, community, stability and long-term recovery success. Our request is narrowly tailored. We are not seeking a change in zoning classification or residential properties. Just an accommodation that allows our home to serve 10 residents where doing so is safe, code compliant and assistant with the home's operation as a supportive recovery residence. Granting this reasonable accommodation would allow recovery residences like ours to meet the growing demand for supportive house while continuing to operate safely responsibly and in a manner consistent with the fair housing act. It represents a balance approach that protects neighborhood interests while ensuring equal housing opportunities for individuals with disabilities who are working diligently to rebuild their lives in recovery. Thank you. >> questions for the applicant? >> is this the only recovery residence that you all operate? >> we do have one. We didn't have to get a special permit for. We only have eight residents in that home. We have one that is already under permit. >> how long has this one been in operation? >> we just moved into this home in MAY of this year. >> so you are just getting started. >> just getting started, yes. Our other home has been in operation for two years. We are fairly new in the recovery housing market. >> do you have a waiting list to get in also? >> we do not maintain a waiting list. We prefer to refer out to other places verse having a waiting list because of the need. So we don't maintain a waiting list. If we did, we would have one absolutely. >> so I'll ask the same questions, asked the other folks r. Is it necessary and is it reasonable? Because those are the questions that we have to answer. >> yes, and I believe I answered those in what I said and I will reiterate. Because of the need, the homelessness population, the homeless population is always increasing. There have been seferlt sober living homes that have shut down that have increased the need for recovery residences. And to give them a fighting chance, right, to become productive members of society and to reintegrate into society in a healthy way. The need for support, they get a lot of support in our homes. any other questions? >> how do you put three people in -- how do you put 10 people in three bedrooms. >> one of our bedrooms is almost 300 square feet. We have one large bedroom that could have been two bedrooms but the design of the home, it's just one. >> do you have a lends of stay, like how long they're allowed to stay there? >> on average, they stay between three and six months. We have had people stay longer, up to a year, because we also work to find them permanent housing. We don't just get them into our homes and then get them -- help them maintain their sobriety and not try to get them safely and secured into permanent housing. >> how many employees do you have there at one time? >> at most, two. We have house leads that manage the home. Those are senior residents of the home. And then I have a house manager that oversees the overall operation of the home. He does not live on site. And then my director of operations will also sometimes be on site helping with different things. So typically no more than two. >> thank you. questions? Discussion for leaning toward approval? >> MR. Clark, you did such a good job reading thraft time, I nominate to you read it again. >> what is your name again? I will be happy to. I'll kuwait alaw to finish my I have a motion? >> >> MR. Chair, with respect to ra-26-3, begin again lex, I move to approve the appeal for a zoning compliance permit to operate as recovery residence for up to 10 individuals at 276 coriander lane as a reasonable accommodation and you the fair housing act for the following reasons 1: requested accomodation is made by or on behalf of disabled persons protected by the fair housing act. 2: requested accommodation is necessary because the residents have two overflow beds for individuals who would otherwise be at serious risk of homelessness. Many of the residents this applicant serves barriers to stable housing and MAY have never lived independently and have no support systems. 3: many facilities have been shut down and that increases the need for recovery residents requested accommodation is reasonable because applicant testified that they have sufficient personal space of 50 feet per person per bedroom in compliance with recovery housing standards as one bedroom is over 300 square feet. 2: applicant testified they have adequate storage food and personal items. 3: applicant testified the average length of stay is 3 to four months. As the applicant assists -- three to six months as the applicant assistses them in finding permanent housing. So moved. >> motion from MR. Clark. Do I have a second? >> second from MR. Walker. Any further discussion? Please cast your vote. You have been approved. Thank you. >> thank you so much. Before we adjourn, is there any staff member that wishes to present anything at this time? >> I've got a question. Will we have a tentative schedule for 2027 next month? >> we will have that available on NOVEMBER 9 to be adopted. >> any board members wish to present anything at this time? With that being a no, our next meeting will be tuesday NOVEMBER 9, 1:30 P.M. This meeting is adjourned.