# Board of Adjustment Meeting - January 30, 2009 > Auto-transcribed civic record · January 30, 2009 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/884 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/884?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2009-01-30 - **Last revised**: July 17, 2026 - **Length**: 4,975 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Fayette County Board of Adjustments met on January 30, 2009, at 1:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 200 East Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky, with Chairman Peter Brown presiding. The board considered eight agenda items during the meeting, hearing three public comments and taking six votes on various zoning appeals and variance requests. Of the items presented, two were withdrawn (Emergency Disaster Services Administrative Appeal and LBX Company, LLC Sign Appeal), one was postponed (Stephen and Cathy Snowden Vehicle Storage Yard), and five were approved by the board. The approved items included a variance for a fence in an R-3 zone for Troy C. Myers, approval of family child care in an R-1D zone for Janet Bartholomew, a child care expansion for Brian Casale and New Horizons Church, a site plan amendment for Fasig-Tipton Company, Inc., and retention of a clubhouse and pool for Atchison-Heller Construction Company. ## Attendance **Present:** Peter Brown, James Griggs, Carolyn Edwards, Barry Stumbo, Kathryn Moore, Jan Meyer, Jim Hume, Barry Brock, Jim Gallimore, Rochelle Boland, Bill Sallee, Jim Marx, Wanda Howard, Marina Wiseman, Troy C. Myers, Janet Veronica Bartholomew, Brian Casale, Susan Zehnder, Ben Palmer-Brown, Darren English, and Rory Kahly. **Absent:** Stout **Late:** None ## Votes and Decisions **V-2009-8: Variance for Troy C. Myers – Fence Setback Reduction** [timestamp: 00:17:25] The Board voted on approval of a variance to reduce the required side yard from 3 feet to 0 feet to allow a fence to remain as built at 3932 Palomar Cove Lane in an R-3 zone. Motion by Stumbo, seconded by Edwards. The variance passed 4-2 on a roll call vote. Voting in favor: Peter Brown, Carolyn Edwards, Kathryn Moore, Barry Stumbo Voting against: James Griggs, Jan Meyer The fence may remain where installed in accordance with the submitted application and site plan. The variance is granted only for allowing the fence to remain where installed and shall not be used to adjust required setbacks for future building additions or other structures. **C-2009-1: Conditional Use Permit for Janet Bartholomew – Family Child Care** [timestamp: 00:22:05] The Board voted on approval of a conditional use permit for family child care for up to 12 children at 1425 Dale Drive in an R-1D zone. Motion by Moore, seconded by Stumbo. The permit passed unanimously 6-0 on a roll call vote. All members voted in favor: Peter Brown, Carolyn Edwards, James Griggs, Jan Meyer, Kathryn Moore, Barry Stumbo Care shall be provided only Monday through Friday between 6:00 AM and 6:00 PM. An occupancy permit must be obtained before increasing care above six children. The rear yard play area must be fenced per Building Inspection requirements. All child care activities must comply with Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services regulations. Approval becomes null and void if the appellant no longer owns or resides at the property. **C-2009-2: Conditional Use Permit for New Horizons Church – Child Care Facility Expansion** [timestamp: 00:31:56] The Board voted on approval of a conditional use permit for New Horizons Church to expand capacity and hours of operation of a child care facility at 420 Fairman Road in an I-1 zone. Motion by Meyer, seconded by Griggs. The permit passed unanimously 6-0 on a roll call vote. All members voted in favor: Peter Brown, Carolyn Edwards, James Griggs, Jan Meyer, Kathryn Moore, Barry Stumbo The facility may accommodate no more than 225 children and must obtain all necessary permits including a Certificate of Occupancy. Drop-off and pick-up arrangements must be actively managed to ensure the rear parking lot is used for that purpose. **C-2009-3: Conditional Use Permit for Fasig-Tipton Company, Inc. – Sales Office Building Amendment** [timestamp: 00:34:43] The Board voted on approval of a conditional use permit for Fasig-Tipton Company, Inc. to amend a previously approved site plan to include a full basement in a new sales office building at 2400 Newtown Pike in an A-R zone. Motion by Edwards, seconded by Stumbo. The permit passed unanimously 6-0 on a roll call vote. All members voted in favor: Peter Brown, Carolyn Edwards, James Griggs, Jan Meyer, Kathryn Moore, Barry Stumbo The building must be set back at least 25 feet from the 100-year floodplain associated with Cane Run Creek. Best Management Practices must be used to protect water quality in the Royal Spring Aquifer Protection Area. The proposed construction must be reviewed by the Royal Spring Aquifer Wellhead Protection Committee prior to permit issuance. **C-2009-6: Conditional Use Permit for Atchison-Heller Construction Company – Clubhouse and Pool** [timestamp: 00:37:24] The Board voted on approval of a conditional use permit for Atchison-Heller Construction Company to retain a clubhouse and pool as principal use on a separate lot at 1950 Fort Harrods Drive in an R-4 zone. Motion by Stumbo, seconded by Griggs. The permit passed unanimously 6-0 on a roll call vote. All members voted in favor: Peter Brown, Carolyn Edwards, James Griggs, Jan Meyer, Kathryn Moore, Barry Stumbo Prior to recording the Final Record Plat, the appellant must demonstrate to Building Inspection that the clubhouse and pool will function as a private club for the 120-unit residential community. A note regarding Board action shall be placed on the subdivision plan. **C-2009-5: Postponement – Stephen and Cathy Snowden Vehicle Storage Yard Appeal** [timestamp: 00:10:37] The Board voted on postponement of a conditional use appeal for Stephen and Cathy Snowden to establish a vehicle storage yard at 311-321 United Court in an I-1 zone. Motion by Brown. The postponement passed unanimously 6-0 on a roll call vote. All members voted in favor: Peter Brown, Carolyn Edwards, James Griggs, Jan Meyer, Kathryn Moore, Barry Stumbo ## Public Comment Three speakers addressed the Board during the public comment period. **Marina Wiseman** [timestamp: 00:05:10] informed the Board that an appeal for emergency disaster services at 801 East New Circle Road has been withdrawn. The appeal was resolved after issues with Building Inspection and Engineering were addressed. Ms. Wiseman noted that the property is currently being used as a staging area for utility workers during an ice storm emergency, with temporary housing and equipment storage on site. She indicated that the site plan is nearly complete. **Brian Casale** [timestamp: 00:26:33] addressed a correction to a prior church application for child care expansion. Mr. Casale explained that the previous application contained flawed data, including incorrect hours and capacity information, which he characterized as an "expensive mistake." The church is now correcting the application and has recently begun construction after experiencing a five-month delay due to state review. **Rory Kahly** [timestamp: 00:36:20] spoke regarding the private club status of a retained clubhouse and pool. Mr. Kahly confirmed that the clubhouse and pool will operate as a private club serving the surrounding residential community. He stated that the board's conditions would be met, including submission of documentation to the Royal Spring Aquifer Wellhead Protection Committee. ## Appointments The following individuals were reappointed to the Fayette County Board of Adjustments: * **Peter Brown** – reappointed to the Fayette County Board of Adjustments * **Stout** – reappointed to the Fayette County Board of Adjustments * **James Griggs** – reappointed to the Fayette County Board of Adjustments ## Contested Items **Precedent Concern for Fence Variance** Councilmember Griggs raised concerns about whether approving the fence variance would establish a problematic precedent. Griggs questioned whether the approval could compromise public safety, specifically regarding emergency egress. Staff responded to this concern by arguing that the large lot setbacks in this particular case made it unique and therefore unlikely to set a concerning precedent. The vote on this item was split among council members. **Fence and Play Area Configuration** Councilmember Hume initiated a heated discussion regarding the proposed fence and play area configuration. Hume expressed concerns about traffic patterns in the backyard play area and sought clarification about whether the driveway would be used during child care hours. To address these concerns, the council conducted a visual review of the site plan. Following this review, the applicant provided confirmation regarding the driveway usage during child care operations. ## Emergency Disaster Services - Administrative Appeal **Case Identifier:** A-2008-101 **Outcome:** Withdrawn Marina Wiseman presented this administrative appeal regarding Emergency Disaster Services. [timestamp: 00:05:10] The appellant withdrew the appeal after resolving outstanding site plan and compliance issues with both Building Inspection and Engineering departments. The property in question is currently being utilized as a staging area for utility workers responding to an ice storm emergency. ## LBX Company, LLC - Sign Appeal **Identifier:** AV-2009-7 **Overview** This agenda item involved an appeal by LBX Company, LLC regarding directional signs that exceeded the allowable size and height limits within an I-1 (Industrial) zone. **Key Speaker** Marina Wiseman presented on this matter. **Outcome** The appeal was withdrawn. The applicant revised the sign package to comply with zoning regulations, making the appeal unnecessary. **Transcript Location** [timestamp: 00:10:06] ## Stephen and Cathy Snowden - Vehicle Storage Yard [timestamp: 00:10:06] This agenda item concerned an appeal for a conditional use permit to establish a vehicle storage yard in an I-1 zone. **Outcome** The Board approved a one-month postponement of this appeal. The postponement was granted due to emergency circumstances affecting the appellant, with the matter rescheduled for the February meeting. ## Troy C. Myers - Variance for Fence in R-3 Zone **Case Number:** V-2009-8 **Outcome:** Approved The Board considered a variance request by Troy C. Myers to allow a fence to remain in place in an R-3 zone despite not meeting the required 3-foot side yard setback. [timestamp: 00:12:51] **Key Speakers:** - Troy C. Myers - James Griggs - Jim Hume **Board Decision:** The Board approved the variance, determining that special circumstances justified an exception to the standard setback requirement. The approval was based on the following factors: - The lot's large setbacks created special circumstances that warranted the variance - The fence placement would have no adverse impact on public welfare - The variance was appropriate given the specific conditions of the property The variance allowed the fence to remain in its current position despite not conforming to the typical 3-foot side yard setback requirement for the R-3 zone. ## Janet Bartholomew - Family Child Care in R-1D Zone [timestamp: 00:18:29] The Board considered a conditional use permit application from Janet Veronica Bartholomew for family child care operations in a single-family residential zone (R-1D Zone). **Outcome** The Board approved the conditional use permit with conditions. **Conditions of Approval** The approval included the following requirements: - Fencing requirements - Operating hours restrictions - Occupancy permit requirements **Key Participants** The discussion involved Janet Veronica Bartholomew, the applicant, and Jim Hume. ## Brian Casale / New Horizons Church - Child Care Expansion [timestamp: 00:26:01] The Board considered an appeal regarding the expansion of a child care facility operated by New Horizons Church in a light industrial zone. Brian Casale and Jim Hume were the key speakers on this agenda item. **Outcome** The Board approved the child care expansion with specific conditions and limitations. **Conditions of Approval** The approval included the following requirements: - Updated site plans must be submitted - Full compliance with construction standards and regulations is required - The facility is limited to a maximum capacity of 225 children The expansion was permitted to proceed in the light industrial zone subject to these conditions being met prior to or during the development process. ## Fasig-Tipton Company, Inc. - Site Plan Amendment The Board considered a conditional use permit to amend a previously approved site plan for Fasig-Tipton Company, Inc. [timestamp: 00:33:32]. The amendment proposed the addition of a full basement in a new sales office building located in an agricultural rural zone. Key speakers on this item included Susan Zehnder and Ben Palmer-Brown. The Board approved the site plan amendment with conditions. The approval included specific requirements related to floodplain setbacks and aquifer protection to address environmental and safety concerns associated with the proposed basement construction in the agricultural rural zone. ## Atchison-Heller Construction Company - Retention of Clubhouse and Pool **Agenda Item:** C-2009-6 **Type:** Appeal **Outcome:** Approved [timestamp: 00:35:49] The Board considered an appeal regarding the retention of a clubhouse and pool as a principal use on a separate lot within a high-density apartment zone. The proposal sought approval for these amenities to serve the surrounding residential community. **Key Speakers:** - Rory Kahly - Jim Hume **Board Action:** The Board approved the retention of the clubhouse and pool, contingent upon specific conditions designed to ensure the facilities function as a private club exclusively for the surrounding community. These conditions were established to clarify the operational parameters and community benefit of the proposed amenities within the high-density residential context. --- ## Decisions - **V-2009-8** — passed (4-2): Approval of variance for Troy C. Myers to reduce required side yard from 3 feet to 0 feet to allow fence to remain as built in R-3 zone at 3932 Palomar Cove Lane - **C-2009-1** — passed (6-0): Approval of conditional use permit for Janet Bartholomew to provide family child care for up to 12 children in R-1D zone at 1425 Dale Drive - **C-2009-2** — passed (6-0): Approval of conditional use permit for New Horizons Church to expand capacity and hours of operation of child care facility in I-1 zone at 420 Fairman Road - **C-2009-3** — passed (6-0): Approval of conditional use permit for Fasig-Tipton Company, Inc. to amend previously approved site plan to include full basement in new sales office building in A-R zone at 2400 Newtown Pike - **C-2009-6** — passed (6-0): Approval of conditional use permit for Atchison-Heller Construction Company to retain clubhouse and pool as principal use on separate lot in R-4 zone at 1950 Fort Harrods Drive - **C-2009-5** — postponed (6-0): Postponement of conditional use appeal for Stephen and Cathy Snowden to establish vehicle storage yard in I-1 zone at 311-321 United Court --- ## Full transcript Music Thank you. The End Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon and welcome to the January meeting of the Fayette County Board of Adjustments. For those of you without power that are attending today, I hope that you get power soon. I'd ask that anyone with a cell phone please turn it to silent or turn it off please so it doesn't disturb the proceedings for those of you who plan on testifying today I'd ask that you raise your right hand do you here today swear or affirm that the testimony you give will be the truth thank you Okay. There are no minutes from prior meetings that have been prepared, so we don't have any of those to consider. So we'll go straight to the agenda. The first case, B 2009-8, Troy C. Myers. Is the applicant here? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Are there any objectors to this case? Mr. Chairman? Yes. We do have some withdrawals and postponements to. Oh, did I skip over that? Forgive me, Mr. Marks. Proceed. I think Ms. Wiseman had to ask you. Ms. Wiseman, do you have a postponement or withdrawal? Sorry, it got out of order. That's all right, Mr. Chairman. For the record, I'm Marina Wiseman. I'm here on a matter on page 4, emergency disaster services. As the Board may recall, we discussed this last month and what we represented to you at that time that we had resolved with building inspection in the Law Department the issue of the permissibility of that use in that zone, which was the issue in our administrative appeal. But the other issue was whether the lot itself was in compliance with other aspects of the regulation in terms of landscaping and screening and so on. And we left here saying that we would submit site plan to the Division of Building Inspection to show a plan to bring in compliance and that we would come back and advise you and withdraw it. I have yesterday delivered a letter to the Division of Planning withdrawing the appeal as is permitted under the bylaws. It doesn't take any action of the board. But I did want to advise you of the status of this property as we discussed last month. We have met with building inspection several times. Mr. Leidenberger prepared a site plan showing parking, landscaping, circulation, and so on. That has been reviewed by the Division of Building Inspection, and at their request, we've made some additions, as has the Division of Engineering. So that plan, as we understand it, is in form where we could obtain a permit to do the work. Now, we also would say to you we expect we can get that done within six months so you have some understanding of the timeframe. Weather permitting, obviously, you can't do landscaping today. The other point I want to bring to your attention is that there was another issue about the non-mobile units being stored on the property, the Lundy's trucks. those have been moved from the property and have been gone for some time. However, there are different trucks out there right now. You may or may not be aware that KU has a contract with EDS. I mean, this is what this company does. As you're aware, there is an ice storm situation in this community, and they are bringing in utility workers from several states. They are using this property as a staging area where they can house. They're using these mobile units to house these employees, to feed them. There are no hotels for these workers, so they're staying there, and they're also using that lot for the utility trucks to go out and help restore the power. They're doing this throughout the state, and they have to have a staging area to do this. So with that caveat that there are trucks there right now that aren't the mobile units, but they're actually being used and this is an emergency situation. Building inspection is aware of it. Mr. Lunderman spoke with the president of the neighborhood association yesterday to advise him that that would be there, I guess, as long as it takes to get the work done. But other than that, that is our report. I'm happy to answer any questions of the board. Okay. I'm confused. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. No. So are you withdrawing your application? Yes. Okay. And you expect to have an approved site plan at some point, not have it completed, obviously, but at some point in the near future? Some point soon, and I think we said this in the letter, that it's our intention to complete the site work before July 31. That's about six months, which we think is reasonable, given enough time for the weather to break. Some things, once the snow melts, you could do, but obviously some things we can't do until the weather breaks. Okay. Does any of the other board members have questions for Ms. Wiseman? Okay. Staff have any? Okay. All right. Well, thanks for informing us of this and I appreciate your client's efforts to resolve the situation. Okay. Thanks. All right. Okay. Now, are there any other postponement or withdrawals? I have one withdrawal to fill you in on and one postponement. The withdrawal is on the last page of your agenda. For LBX Company, that's the sign appeal. They've revised their sign package to meet the rules. So that's been withdrawn. We have a letter from them. That's case A-V 2009-7. Okay. The postponement is for the Snowden request for a vehicle storage yard. On page 3 of your agenda. Item number four, C2009-5. Mr. Snowden is dealing with emergency issues right now, so he just can't make it. He's requested just a one-month postponement for that. Okay. On the postponement, we need to take action, correct? All those in favor of postponing C2009-5, Stephen Cathy Snowden's... What is this? their conditional use appeal to our February meeting. Please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Okay, so it's postponed to February. Any other postponement or withdrawals? Okay. All right. Okay. So the next case is C, 2009-1, Janet Bartholomew. Is Ms. Bartholomew here? Aye. And are there any objectives here for that case? Aye. And next case is C2009-2, Brian Casale, New Horizons Church. Yes, sir. Are you Mr. Casale? Okay. Are there any objectives here for that case? Okay. Next case is C2009-3, Faisa Tipton Company. Okay. You're the applicant. Okay. Are there any objectors here for that case? Next case is C. 2009-6 Atchison Heller Construction Company. Okay. Here for them. Any objectors to that case? Okay. All right. Now, is there anyone here who's not heard their case called? All right. Then we'll start with V2009-8, Troy B. Myers. Come forward, please. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Could you state your name for the record, please? Troy Myers. We are representing Susan Irwin, the homeowner where we erected the fence at 3932 Palomar Cove. Okay. And so are you the contractor? Yes, sir. Okay. Now, the staff has recommended approval. Are there any additional comments from staff? Any questions from the board? For the staff, I'd like to understand whether the law needs to be rewritten or if we're comfortable setting a precedent that allows someone sort of, as long as the egress, the ability for emergency vehicles to go through a yard, if that's possible, then are we just going to ignore this law in the future? I don't think the purpose was for actual vehicles to get through there, but generally for property maintenance and for emergency personnel to get through there unobstructed. The rule was designed under the assumption that in the R3 zone for single-family detached residences, you can build on each side of a side property line as close as three feet. And in many new developments, that's what happens. So that only leaves six feet of open space between the actual walls of the residences. So that's why the rule was written to prevent any obstructions within that six feet of open area. Now cases do come up where homes are built with a much larger setback, which is the case here. So I don't think it's setting a bad precedent by any means. I don't think we'd want to do a text amendment just for this particular issue, but in association with other things as they come up, that might happen in the future to clarify when that three feet is critical and when it's not. Any other questions? These people were given a permit with a plan that was in place. Is that correct? It is. We got a permit. We had the outlined objective of what the homeowner wanted. and then at some time after the permit was obtained, there were some amendments to the scope of the work. Instead of coming off the back corners of the house, it was decided that we would make a little adjustment and come off the front corners of the house. I guess my point here is, though, you were given a permit for a certain plan and then you changed the plan. Yes, ma'am. Was there any thought that maybe you had to go back and discuss that with the building inspection people? Well, in hindsight, definitely. I mean, we didn't realize at the time when we got the permit, we do probably between 200 and 300 jobs a year in Fayette County and surrounding counties. and I'm sure it was on the permit that it was in an R3 zone but on the left side of the property is commercial zoning. The back of the property abuts to about 20 acres of farmland and so you would think that it would be okay in that instance. in hindsight we should have gone back and requested another permit any other questions discussion if not i'll call for a motion mr chairman item v 2009-8 troy myers appeals for a variance to reduce the required site yard from 3 feet to 0 feet in order to locate a fence to remain as built in a planned neighborhood R3 zone on property located at 3932 Palomar Cove Lane be approved with the recommendations as set forth by the staff. Second. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo. All those in favor of Mr. Stumbo's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Aye. Okay. So it's 4-2-2. Motion passes. Thank you very much for your time. You're welcome. Hope not to see you again, Mr. Myers. Thank you. Next case is C-2009-1. Janet Bartholomew. Good afternoon. Would you state your name, please? Janet Bartholomew. Janet Veronica Bartholomew. All right. Thank you, ma'am. Now, the statute of the state of the state, the state of the state, the state of the state, Now the staff has recommended approval of your case subject to five conditions. Have you reviewed those conditions? The conditions? Yes, ma'am. You can repeat it for me if you want to. All right. Well, maybe one of the staff has a copy of it they can show it to you. Oh, you mean what's on the paper? Okay. I read it. Have you read those ma'am? Yes. Okay. You agreed to abide by those? Yes. Now, I have a question for Mr. Hume. There's – from reading the report, there's some concerns with the fence. I haven't visited this property. Now, will your – let's see. Okay, condition number two is that you will issue an occupancy permit. will it be a requirement that the fence be repaired and in good shape before that occupancy permit is issued? Yes. What the applicant needs to do is install the fence and have all the conditions met prior to calling me. She will call me, make an appointment, I will come out, investigate, and then issue a CO for the certificate of occupancy. All right. So do you understand my question, ma'am? that you'll have to get the fence repaired and obtain a new fence I now put on I now put up I'm sorry I've now put new fence you've now put up new fence okay right around okay well that's good thank you but you'll have to complete these five requirements and then when those are all completed they might be all completed now I don't know they all are okay well now that those are completed you can obtain a occupancy permit from the division of building inspection but you won't be able to accept the additional children until you receive that permit okay understand that yes I can go anytime to receive yes ma'am they'll come out and inspect your property and then issue one does anyone Anyone else have any questions for staff or Ms. Bartholomew? Okay. If not, then I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that C-2009-1, Janet Bartholomew's appeal for a conditional use permit to provide family child care for up to 12 children in a single-family residential R1D zone on property located at 1425 Dale Drive be approved for the reasons recommended by the staff and subject to the conditions recommended by the staff. Thank you, Ms. Moore. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo. Excuse me. Before you vote, do you have a photograph of the backyard? Jim, there seems to be some concern over here about the play area and how the rear yard is configured. Do you just want us to put that up on the overhead, Mr. Yun? Yes, if you don't mind. Are you, ma'am, are you going to use the whole rear yard for play area? Yes. Well, I have a shed in the backyard. What about the driveway? Is it going to be used? Yes. Well, it can hold two cars in the driveway. How about in the backyard? It seems like the driveway in the backyard too? Yes, it's going right around to the backyard. Mr. Marks, have you been up in the LFUCG dirigible again? Took these photos? The technical folks are working on that. I was not out there at night, I can guarantee it. Okay. I guess my main concern is will there be traffic back there backing in and out while your kids are back there? No. No, we have no traffic, just the kids. Okay. I just wanted the staff to be aware of this, of the board. we'll just pass that around so you can get a better look that's okay we're satisfied i'll take a look at it in the office but all right just a concern all right okay Ms. Bartholomew, at the end, at the driveway up near your house, in the entrance to your backyard, is there a gate there? Yes, a gate, yes. I'll let everyone else look at this photograph, and then we should be able to proceed with the vote. Okay. Everyone had a chance to look at the photograph? All right, then we have a motion by Ms. Moore. All those in favor of Ms. Moore's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Okay. Motion passes. Congratulations, good luck to you. Thank you. Second time. Mr. Chairman, is this not on? No, it's not on because they found they found we could do bad. I know. Okay, next case is C2009-2, Brian Cassell, New Horizons Church. Are you Mr. Cassell? I am, Brian Cassell. Am I pronouncing that right? Cassell. Cassell, okay. Now, Mr. Casale, the staff has recommended approval of your application with how many conditions? Subject to five conditions? Yes, sir. Have you reviewed those conditions? Yes, I have. And do you and your church agree to abide by those? Yes, we do. Okay. Now, you were here last February. That's correct. obtained a conditional use at that time? Yes. Now, the staff report didn't make, wasn't clear based on what they said, whether you had fully complied with the requirements that were, the conditions that were established in the February case last year. If I may, I'll give you a quick update on that. Please, I would like to. First of all, our reapplying today is simply because we made a mistake on our last application. we were not fully aware of what we would need in terms of hours and capacity, and so we put those numbers that we knew at the time on our application. We've actually come back around now knowing what our hours and our capacity are, and so we just sort of had an expensive mistake in the sense that if we had known that back then, we would have done this all at one time. The update on terms of where we are, we have just started construction, So this has been a long process for us because the state held up our plans for five months for the daycare. So we are just now into construction and completing and complying with all of these requests, such as the sidewalk and so forth. So that's where the update is right now. Okay. And how many kids are currently enrolled in your daycare? None at this point, as we are still under construction. We're just now taking employment applications and enrollment applications. Okay. Now, I've got a question for staff. Mr. Hume, will the occupancy permit for the increased number of children, will that be contingent upon them completing the repairs or the construction from the February case? Yes. Okay. So there won't be any children there until the construction is completed. Right. That's correct. Right. And they've not offered or asked us for a certificate of occupancy on the first case, so I will just void that case and do my inspections based on these requirements of the higher number. That's okay. We have not even gone to the Child Development Council yet for the licensing proper because we're not there yet. Okay. It's been a longer process than we had expected. Well, I'm pleased that you've proceeded in this manner. You're the exception. Generally, we have to tell people that people will come in and already accepted over their limit. and we have to admonish that that's not correct. So I appreciate you. I hope that's never the case for us. No. Well, you can tell your parishioners that we're pleased they proceeded this matter. Great. Thank you. Can I have one question? I have one question just to clarify. When it says 225 children is the limit, is that at one time or total? That's at one time. Yes. And your play area will be inside, is that correct? No, sir. It will actually be outside. Where is that going to be? It's not depicted. If you have a picture of our building, there's actually a green space attached to the – I'm not going to get my north, southeast, west correct, but there's green property actually attached to the building at one location, and that's been approved for us to put a play area there. It'll be fenced in. Approved by who? I'm assuming when we did all of this last February that that was agreed to at that time. We have 3,400 square feet of play area? Yes. It would be where that large area up in the upper left corner of the screen, that is actually that green space right there where the pen is. So you're going to have to cross the parking area to get to that? No, not at all. The concrete path that the board has asked for actually will come out of the building and go back to that back parking area so that you'll not cross any parking in order to get to the play area, either children or adults no one so that play area will be fenced off to traffic all the way around yes sir all right thanks could we get a revised site plan showing that since none of this is depicted on this particular map yes thank you mr. hume does that need to be a condition please okay are you agreeable with that mr that's fine yeah not a problem so that would be maybe the staff can come up with some language that number six would be a revised site plan I think if you look number one talks about an amended site plan yes indicating the completion of all driveway and sidewalk improvements okay and depicting the play area and that would probably take care of by just amending that one okay if I may mr. chairman that's what I thought as well is that one actually covered that and when we were done with full construction we would submit those plans showing that we've approved before we would open or ask for the occupancy permit that was my understanding okay so we just add completion of all driveway sidewalk improvements and play area mm-hmm yeah okay okay fence play areas and risk say let's agree so absolutely okay All right. Are there any other questions or discussion? If not, that look okay to you? Yes, sir. Okay. Then I'll ask, if there's no other questions or discussions, I'll ask for a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move that we, in regard to case C2009-2, Brian Cassell, New Horizons Church appeal for a conditional use permit to expand the capacity and hours of operation of a childcare facility in a light industrial zone I One on property located at 420 Fairman Road be approved subject to the conditions As recommended by the staff and as approved as recommended by the staff Thank You miss Meyer do I have a second second Thank you, Mr. Griggs. All those in favor of Ms. Meyer's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Okay. The motion passes. Thank you all very much. All right. Good luck to you, sir. Thank you. case is C 2009-3 Fasig Tipton Company. Good afternoon. Would you state your name please? Susan Zender. And Ben Palmer Ball. Oh my goodness. Susan, what's your last name please? Zender, Z-E-H-N-D-E-R. okay and sir your name it's Ben Palmer ball it's two words Palmer and ball okay thank you and we also have Darren English here who is in a representative of a basic tipton he's not speaking but present sure all right thank you for being here the staffs recommended approval of your conditional use subject to the five recommendations have you reviewed those recommendations we have okay do you agree to bye-bye those yes sir okay are there any questions for the applicant discussion sorry we got a mute crowd today seem like we have something we should pick on you about but I can't find it so if there's no discussion or questions I'll ask for a motion mr. chair I would like to recommend C 2009-3 Fasig Tipton Company Incorporated appeals for a conditional use permit to amend a previously approved site plan clarifying that a new sales office building will include a full basement in the agricultural rural AR zone on property located at 2400 Newtown Pike and Council District 6 be approved as recommended by staff with the five conditions that are set forth. Is there a second? Second. All right thank you. All those in favor of Ms. Edwards motion please signify by saying aye. All those opposed? All right Congratulations, motion passes. Thank you all. Good luck to you. Thank you. Sure. Okay. All right. The next case is C2009-6, Atchison-Heller Construction Company. Good afternoon. Hello. How are you? Good. I'm Rory Cayley with EA Partners. I'm here on behalf of Hatches and Heller. Mr. Keely? The staff's recommended approval of conditional use subject to the three conditions. Have you and your client reviewed those conditions? Yes. Do you agree to abide by those? Yes. Are there any questions for Mr. Keely? Any discussion? I have a question. Mr. Brown, if you don't mind. Is this a private club? Yes. Okay. We picked up the questionnaire from Nancy, and the lawyers are filling it out. We'll get it to you prior to asking for the plat creating the lot. Okay, just for the board's information, this is a private club, so it'll have to meet private club requirements in the ordinance. So I just wanted to mention that it was a private club and additional requirements. All right. And if you could just put a fourth condition that should meet private club requirements. Is that right, Jim? Is there something missing in condition number three, Jim? Or condition number two, sorry? I'm sorry. Private club. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. Never mind. Okay. Does that satisfy, Mr. Hume? Okay. Anyone have any questions or discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move that Item C-2009-6, Actions and Heller Construction Company appeals for a conditional use permit to allow existing clubhouse and pool to be retained as principal use on separate lot and high-density apartment R4 zone on property located at 1950 Fort Harrods Drive be approved with the conditions as set forth by the staff. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo. Do I have a second? I'll second. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Griggs. All those in favor of Mr. Stumbo's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? All right. Motion passes unanimously. Good luck to you. Thank you. Take care. Let's see. Well, if I'm reading my agenda correctly, I believe we've reached the end of our cases. End of the cases, yes, but we've still got election of officers and… Okay. All right. Now we have board items and first meeting of the year, so we'll have an election of officers. We'll open the floor to nominations. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to nominate our current chair as chairman of the board. And I'd also, I know Mr. Stout is not here, so he, I'd like to go ahead and put forth his name as nomination as vice chair and he's not here to argue that point. Mr. Meaney, you're going to be in trouble when it comes to elections. Mr. Chair, I think we also need a secretary. Well, I have a nomination for that. Since we have a staff member who's been serving us faithfully for months and months, I'd like to nominate Ms. Brenna Howard as our secretary. Believe it or not, I've been, you can't? Now, I can nominate you. I can nominate you because I've been reading the bylaws, and I know that probably scares some people. As a lawyer, I try not to let the law stand in my way. And the secretary does not need to be a member of the board, but the other, the chair and vice chair do. But if Ms. Howard does not want to serve, then I'll let you nominate somebody, Mr. Stumbo. Are you sure, Ms. Howard? Then I believe, because currently I believe our secretary is Mr. Griggs, and he has done such an outstanding job as secretary of this board. I'd like to re-nominate Mr. Griggs as secretary if he'd agree to that. All right. Any discussion? Any other nominations? No. Okay. Okay, with all those in favor of Mr. Stumbo's nominations, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Thank you very much. Now, are there any staff items we need to address? I have an item. I'd like to bring for the board next month a revocation hearing for offender funeral homes. at 1593 Russell Cave Road for failure to meet all their conditions. They have yet to put in all their required parking and landscaping. Did we grant them a conditional use or variance a couple of years ago? Yeah. O-5. And I've kind of given them some slack and made notification with them, and they said, oh, yeah, we're meant to call you, and we're going to come in and try to go back to the board, so I'm just going to expedite their return. So is this the funeral home that was right before the library? Yes, sir. Okay. All right. I remember that case. Okay. And that's just so we know that it's going to be back on next month? Yes, sir. All right. Well, I think you have to make a motion. Oh, we do have to make a motion? Okay. For revocation. Then I'll entertain a motion to honor Mr. Hume's request. So moved. All right. Thank you, Mr. Griggs. Do I have a second? Second. All right. Thank you, Ms. Myers. All those in favor of Mr. Griggs' motion to permit Mr. Hume to bring a case back on for review, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? All right. Thank you, Mr. Hume. Jim, what was the address for that again? 1593 Russell Cave Road. I've got a case number if you'd like. C 2005-53. All right. Any other staff items? Yes, Mr. Chairman. If I could refer you to the middle of page 5 on behalf of Mr. Griggs, we would ask you to have a motion to delegate your secretarial duties to planning services staff. It might, we hope, prove helpful to the board. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Salih. Do I have a motion to delegate Mr. Griggs' duties? Pitiful, pitiful. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor of delegating Mr. Griggs meager duties to planning staff, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? That means we'll have to cut Mr. Griggs salary. That's right. Let's see. Any other staff items? Okay. Our next meeting is February 27th, 2009. If there's no other business i'll adjourn the meeting at this time you Thank you.