I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon and welcome to the July meeting of the Fayette County Board of Adjustments. For those of you with cell phones, I'd ask that you either turn those off or turn them to silent mode, please. Anyone that anticipates testifying today, I'd ask you to raise your right hand and you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give here today will be the truth. All right. Thank you. We have minutes from the September 2008, February 2009, and June 2009 meetings have been prepared. I ask if everyone's reviewed those, and if they have, if there are any motions concerning those minutes. So moved. Okay. All those in favor of Mr. Stumbo's motion to approve our minutes from the September 08, February 09, and June 09 meetings, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, thank you. We didn't get a second. Oh. I'll second. I'll second. All right. Thank you. Do we need to vote again? All right. Thanks. Let's see. Okay. First I'll ask if there are any matters that are going to be postponed or withdrawn. Would you please come forward to the podium, please? Good afternoon. I'd like to ask that the board grant me a postponement until the next session. I'm sorry, ma'am. Postponement. No, I'm sorry. I don't know your name. Sandra Shriver. I'm the last one on the docket. Okay. And you'd like it postponed until? Yes, sir. Until the next session. The August meeting? Yes, sir. Well, without my scare, I don't know that we can grant that motion. Okay. Any discussion? If not, I'll ask for a motion. Okay. Okay. Is there anyone here in opposition to this case? Okay. All right. Sir, would you come forward, please? Good afternoon. Would you state your name, please? Okay. Do you oppose postponing this to the August meeting? All right, thank you. And Mr. Griggs, do you have a question? I'm in the middle of litigation trying to resolve something on this matter with attorneys. Could you tell us a little more about that? It's being actually taken before the division, civil division, for an appeal for an adverse possession of the property. So I'd like to be able to get the court date set for that before anything. My lawyer just had advised Mr. DeBose's lawyer that we would be postponing it as of yesterday, and they said that they'd be willing to do that as well. And 30 days to the next meeting is okay with you? That's fine at the moment, just to see what goes on there. The two lawyers are trying to work together on something, and I was just told that I needed to show up down here because it was so soon up to the date that I wasn't able to, I guess, send a letter or whatever I needed to do. Well, thank you. I appreciate it. And that's acceptable? Any other questions or discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. I move we postpone it for 30 days. Okay. All those in favor of Ms. Meyer's motion to – I'll catch on eventually. I'll second that, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo. Keep me in line. All right. All those in favor of Ms. Meyer's motion to postpone A 2009-47 Sandra Shriver's case until the August meeting, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? See you in August. Thank you. I'll try to have a mascara on that. Thank you. All right. All right. Any other postponements or withdrawals? If not, I'll run through the docket. First case is V 2009-43, Kistine Properties, Lexington 2, LLC. Is the applicant here in that case? Are there any objectors here for that case? V 2009-44, William Kevin Murphy. Is the applicant here in that case, Mr. Murphy? Are there any objectors here for that case? V 2009-45 David J. and Mary Rose Martin. Is the applicant here? Are there any objectors here for that case? All right. Oh, okay. Okay. Thank you. V2009-46 Lexington Habitat for Humanity. Is the applicant here? Thank you. Are there any objectors here for that case? CV2009-40 Haymaker Development Company. Is the applicant here? Are there any objectors here for that case? C. 2002-2, the Episcopal Diocese of Lexington. The applicant here. Okay. Mr. Hume, do you have any information for us? No, I expected them to show up. We've got their plans, but they shouldn't be here to represent themselves today. I agree. All right, I'll just mark it to be heard. C, 2005-53, Fender Funeral Directors. The applicant here. Are there any objectors here for that case? C, 2009-36, Gerald Johnson. Are you the applicant? Are there any objectors here for that case? C 2009-37, Salish Bhavania. Are there any objectives here for that case? Thank you. C 2009-38, Hope Center, Inc., the applicant here. Are there any objectors here for that case? C-2009, that's 39, Gail Turner, Ms. Turner. Are there any objectors here for that case? Thank you. Our next case is A2009-41, Larry W. Hamilton, the applicant here in that case. Larry Hamilton. Are there any objectors here for that case? Well, that one's recommended disapproval. All right. I'd ask that the folks that are here objecting go outside and meet with the applicants to see if they can answer any questions or help you resolve your objections to the case. We'll start with D2009-43 Castine Properties, Lexington 2. Okay. Well, the staff's recommended disapproval on that one, so it'll be heard. Are you Mark Seaver? Okay. All right. The applicant here for Castine Properties. All right. Could you state your name, please? Jeff Dockman. And your name, sir? David Thompson. And you are the principals of Casting Properties? I am. And you're Lexington, too? Architect. Architect, okay. The staff's recommended approval subject to three conditions. Have you both reviewed those conditions? They're fine. Mr. Chairman, we have an additional condition we'd like to add if we could go over that at this time. Okay. It should come up on the screen there. There's a possibility that once this goes through the permitting stage, that traffic engineering will want to modify some of the parking arrangements and traffic circulation aisles, possibly depending on more details of what uses are going to go on there in that building. So that's the kind of thing that's normally handled through the permitting process, but just to give that some emphasis and make sure the applicant was aware of that, and we'd like to add this condition number four about the final design of the parking layout and circulation, shall be subject to review and approval by the Division of Traffic Engineering. That seems like a good idea to me. Are there any questions for the applicant or staff? Any discussion? No, sir. No, it's fine with us. I'm asking the board members. While they're thinking about it, how about condition number four there? Are you guys okay with that? Very much so. Okay, good. I just have a question about the trees are part of the site plan, and that's included in condition number one? Yes, it is. Any other questions or discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. I move that case V 2009-43, casting 2 LLC, appeal for variance to reduce the required setback from a residential zone for storage units with overhead doors from 100 feet to 60 feet in a light industrial I-1 zone on property located at 981 Contract Street be approved as recommended by staff and subject to the four conditions set forth by the staff. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Second. Thank you, Ms. Edwards. All those in favor of Ms. Meyer's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Good luck to you, fellas. Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Next case is V2009-44, William Kevin Murphy. MR. Murphy, good afternoon. Would you state your name for the record, please? MR. Yes, my name is William Kevin Murphy and I am the appellant. MR. Any questions for Mr. Murphy or staff? MR. This letter. I have a question for staff. I'm unclear how this, if we grant this relief, how it will not increase the level of nonconformity. Well, with regard to the setback, the setback that's there now won't be any less. So from that perspective, there won't be any increase in nonconformity. Has staff received any drawings on what the structure would look like with the revised roof? We didn't have any elevation drawings, but it looks like Mr. Murphy has. I do have a brief PowerPoint that would show those images if it would please the board. It may be a little overkill. There's more to it than just the drawings, but it's very short. Maybe you could just limit it to the drawings. Yeah. Of course, I always look forward to an opportunity to present renovation pictures, which is what some of them are. It worked at my office. I believe the drawings are about eight or so. Of course, those are... Well. Yes, they're coming. There we go. There's front elevation. And their simple drawing is a very simple design and allows no overhang on any of the four sides of the existing concrete block walls. So that would be the design that was approved by the Board of Architectural Review on July 8th, and it does include a dormer that imitates the dormer on the third floor of my home. And this would be a left side elevation from inside my yard, and it shows the gable end and the dormer with a new pedestrian doorway as well as a window in the storage area up above. And again, no overhang on either side there. And this would be a right side elevation from my neighbor's yard, again showing no window and showing no overhang in the dormer in the background. And then a rear elevation simply showing the gable roof from my backyard neighbor's property. Again, no overhang. And I am 18 inches away from that property line. Now, would this variance be needed if you weren't trying to include some storage space overhead? No, it wouldn't be necessary. But I would, if you would indulge me just for a minute, there are some photographs that show the existing condition of the garage, and it pretty well illustrates why it's not a good idea. to either keep what's there or rebuild what was there in terms of, I believe, starting with slide four. And this image shows the garage at the time in 1998 when I purchased the property. And you can see, and I'll get Mr. Hume from the building inspector's office to address the header in this application. If you go to the next image, even the next one there, the next one after this one shows a close-up detail of what my garage header was like prior to some repairs that I did to try to stabilize the building in 1999 shortly after I purchased it. And I do have a little history scenario on one of the pages of the PowerPoint that describes in detail what I've tried to do to stabilize. I've re-roofed that building twice in 10 years. The structure on it is of such a nature that it was built out of used material. It has an improper slope. It was sized improperly. It has just been a nightmare. So my goal here was to not only improve the leakage to the building, but also do something that could have been done in 1955 when the permit was issued for that garage, but also try to do something that's a little bit more in character with the surrounding properties and their garages. So that's, you know, it is storage, but it does have the gable roof. I have a, Mr. Brown, I have only one concern. I noticed that the roof slope was a lot steeper on the new, and there was a window up there. I was wondering, you were talking about nonconformity. Yes. Obviously, the original garage did not have storage above and probably no accessibility. I'm assuming this has a stairwell to the second floor. It will have, yes. Is it going to be, what's the finished ceiling height going to be in there? In the. On the second floor. Well, there won't be a finished ceiling, but I think. You know what I'm trying to get at. Under the ridge, it's a little under 80 feet. Okay. See, I'm just concerned about the amount of storage up there. If you want to look at nonconformity, it talks about cubic feet as far as expanding cubic footage. This would certainly, the original garage did not have storage above. This is going to have it, and then somewhere in the future could be probably finished out to be an office space or a rec room or something like that. So I'm concerned with that a little bit. Other than that, as far as the perimeter, I don't worry about that. So you see it as an increase of the nonconformity by adding this? I think it could be interpreted that way. All right. All right. Thank you, Mr. Haring. Okay. Any other questions? Well, Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out one more image on my PowerPoint. If you'll go back a couple of slides to the photograph, the black and white photograph, That was sent to me by Mrs. Nancy Reed, who was one before that. Please, the one before, yeah, that one. And it shows the garage that was existing in the same location prior to 1955. And it does show that it did have some storage above. It was not a flat roof structure. And, you know, granted, it's not quite the pitch I'm proposing, but by the same token, And I have no intention of anything but storage up there, now or in the future. So that's, I mean, I have front porch furniture, patio furniture, awnings on my house that right now I'm having to either leave out or store in the attic of my house. And it just would be a great convenience to me to be able to store those items in a garage rather than either leaving them out or carrying them up to the attic of my home. And I would be happy for a condition to be placed on it that there would be no habitable space up there. That would be fine with me. I have no objection to that. Mr. Chair, can I ask Mr. Hume a question? Yeah, absolutely. Mr. Hume, if this garage was demolished and he chose to rebuild a two-car garage back there and adhered to the 18-inch setback, would he be able to build a storage above the garage? Yes. I was just speaking to the nonconformity issue. I have to say, Mr. Murphy, that after looking at those concrete block walls that you're trying to retain, I don't understand the financial or the aesthetic purpose for it. Why wouldn't you just tear that thing down and build one where it belongs? Well, that was my intent originally. I started planning this project about five months ago. And, of course, knowing that there could be an issue with nonconformity, and, of course, the Board of Architectural Review, five months ago I contacted both of those offices. My initial meeting with the building inspector's office in February, I believe, I was told I would not have to go before the Board of Adjustment on this because they would handle it as a remodeling permit. When I submitted my final drawings for the Board of Architectural Review, of which I have a set here, I stopped by building inspection to make sure I was within the code for residential design of stairways. And upon reviewing those drawings with a different inspector at the same counter, I was told I'd have to go to the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Murphy, my question still is why are you trying to save those dilapidated concrete block walls? I'm getting there. I'm getting there. I was told initially that it could be handled as a remodeling project if I kept those walls. In addition, I've had a preservation masonry person, Amos Burdett, who does a lot of restoration work, he has inspected those and has assured me they can be crowded and reinforced and they'll be fine. And it would be a cost savings. And we're planning to stucco the exterior so that you wouldn't see any of the coursing of the block. Well, I did cost it out, and it is going to save a substantial amount of money to repair. Mr. Murphy, I wanted to ask, what's your timetable to complete this project? Well, I have contracted with the masonry contractor, and he assures me he can finish the work in about five days. And I've also contracted with Eric Stork of Stork Construction, LLC, and he too is a licensed contractor in Fayette County. He assures me the framing And all of the work will be complete in about five to seven days. Five to seven days? Yes. Ms. Meyer, did you have a question? That was my question. Okay. Any other questions or discussion? Mr. Brown, I just want to make sure that the board knows I'm not against the project. I just wanted to bring that to light. And Mr. Murphy did offer a condition to not finish the upstairs and build it in a way that would be used as an office or storage or rec room or any kind of occupiable space. And I think that might be a consideration the board takes is to add a condition in the future, regardless if he owns the property or someone else. Mr. Hume, are you okay with the staircase up to unfinished storage? Yes. Okay. I have a question. I thought you indicated that if the distance between the side property line and the garage met the side yard setbacks, that there would be no problem with him having that space above the garage. Would he still not be able to have it finished as a room? Because the only nonconformity here is, my understanding, is what we're going to create by giving him the variance, which is not a legal nonconforming structure. I mean, this is what happens every time you grant a variance. And it's my understanding that as it stands, these masonry block walls are in conformity. They sit 18 inches off the side property line, and is that not? I thought your report indicated that that was the side yard setback. Is that not correct? It's 12 inches. The existing setback is 12, and that's what they want to maintain with the remodel. Okay, but that is a nonconforming side yard setback. The setback is nonconforming. Okay. I think all this talk about the size being nonconforming is. Right. The only nonconformity is the side yard setback issue, not the size of the structure. So my question is, if it sat appropriately off the sideline, would he be permitted to have finished space above there as long as it wasn't an additional dwelling? He would be able to? Then he's not increasing a nonconformity by doing that. If he's willing to volunteer that condition, that's fine, but you're literally taking something away from him that anybody else in his neighborhood could do. Because the only nonconformity here is the side yard setback, not the square footage area of his accessory structure. All right. Thank you, Ms. Bowling. Oh, one other point that I would want to add from the building inspector's office in the review, and Mr. Hube, you can maybe clarify this. I'm not sure whether it's three feet or five feet from the property line now. the building code requires a one-hour fire wall or fire separation wall? Yes, less than five feet, and I have built that into the design of the second floor rafters and wood structure. The existing block walls are rated at a two-hour fire separation, and I will have a one-hour fire separation within five feet of any surrounding property. So it will conform with the code in that respect and virtually eliminate most or all danger of any exploding automobiles or anything. All right. Thank you. Are there any other questions or any discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I'll move that we approve V200944 William Murphy's appeal for a variance to reduce the required side yard from six inches to one foot in order to add a new roof to a detached garage in the two-family residential historic district overlay R2H1 zone on property located at 141 West Bell Court, Council District 3. based on the staff's recommendations and subject to their three conditions. I don't think that fourth condition will be necessary. Second. Thank you, Ms. Edwards. All those in favor of Mr. Griggs' motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, motion passes. Good luck to you, sir. Okay, thank you. Next case is V2009-46 Lexington Habitat for Humanity. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Can you state your name, please, sir? Adam Bradshaw. Bradshaw? Bradshaw, sir. Now, Mr. Bradshaw, the staff has recommended an approval of your request subject to two conditions. Have you reviewed those conditions? Yes, sir. Have you and your organization agreed to abide by them? Yes, sir. One was the pulling, adjusting the building permit with this variance and setback, and I don't have the other. The rear deck. The rear deck. All right. Any questions for the applicant? Any discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'll move that item V200946, Lexington Habitat for Humanity, appeals for a variance to reduce the required rear yard from 10 feet to 5 feet in order to retain an elevated wood deck in the two-family residential zone on property located at 408 Peachtree Road, be approved, subject to the conditions as set forth by the staff. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. All those in favor of Mr. Stumbo's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Good luck to you, sir. Thank you, sir. All right. Now, in the 2009-40 case, Haymaker Development, the Chair is confused. Were there any objectors here for that case? No? If not, then would the applicant please come forward? Good afternoon. Say your name, please. Yes, good afternoon. I'm Tim Haymaker, 3120 Wall Street, the developer of the – sorry, I thought somebody was talking to me. The developer of Beaumont Center and this amenity that we are going to build as an amphitheater. generally speaking most of the conditions are acceptable to us we do have some requests that we would like to adjust some of the conditions and I think once you see them there may have been some misconceptions particularly about maybe addresses or maybe even about some of the handicapped accessibility. This facility will be in the center of the circle at Beaumont Center. It will be owned by a not-for-profit corporation called the Moondance Foundation, This entity will be called Moondance at Midnight Pass. The not-for-profit corporation is being formed, and it essentially is my son Andy, myself, and another administrative person in our office. The purpose of this foundation is to maintain the facility. It will have some fees to people who use the facility. They'll be minimal, but the only purpose of those fees will be the upkeep of a relatively pretty high-intensive, intensely used piece of property, which will have a lot of grass to cut, a lot of, we'll do irrigation, we'll have lots of other amenities that take money. We will initially endow the foundation, and all of this is a gift to the community. my associate C.M. Gatton is donating the land 1.6 acres of commercial land it's appraised at $1,050,000 this particular structure and amenities on top started at about $500,000 now we're up to about $700,000 and that is all funded and no debt just a gift to the community we have a good bit of demand we have met with many people Jim Clark from LexArts Everett McCorvey from the university and every time we meet with somebody they want some more stuff and we've been able to do that so far Everett wanted additional dressing rooms separate from what we originally had as joint use dressing rooms and for the public. When we decided to build those, we decided that it was a great opportunity to add a concession area, not to be run by us, we're not in the concession business, but to be run by the or be utilized by particular entities that may be renting that night, whether it be Rosa Parks Elementary and they want to sell popcorn or snow cones or whatever, that's fine with us. We don't have anything to do with that other than we will be constructing that. And we have also had, I'm trying to think of the girl's name, Amber Llewellyn from Parks and Recreation, requested that we change our flooring from concrete on the stage to wood. And if you looked at today's paper, it's kind of a timely point to talk about that. It's about the ballet under the stars. and they're building, they have to build that stage every year, and then they have to disassemble it, and so they've asked us to use wood in the floor so that we could accommodate dancers, which we have done that. All of these things are at an expense, but, again, we made business judgments and decisions and financial decisions, and we decided to proceed with all this. So we think there's going to be a great deal of activity. we have done an enormous amount of work trying to get this project ready we've done sun studies to where we know when a person's standing at three o'clock on whatever day of april where their shadow is going to be and trying to locate things and do things in an appropriate way And one of the issues that you've asked us is to expand, or you have listed a significant list of addresses that you would like to have parking on. And one of the purposes of coming up with this and being able to do something that was active rather than a passive water fountain or just a park was we recognized in Beaumont Center, we have probably a million square feet of office at this point. And at nights and weekends, there's nobody in those parking lots. However, in the retail area, they're jam-packed. And there is one address, which is 3194, Beaumont Center Circle, that actually makes up six professional office lights. It's not just one light. It's six lights. and there will be just within those six lots and one of those lots is contiguous. Now, we don't have them divided up yet because we don't know what size the user is going to be or how many, whether it's a three-story building or two-story building, whatever. We do have one building under construction. That's a three-story, 30,000-square-foot building to Whittaker Bank Corp. It's a guy named Jimmy Balls building it. We have currently an easement to park on his property. About 120 parking spaces. He also owns two adjoining buildings where Fork Bank is and where his own offices are. About 120 spaces in each one of those. We also have signed agreements on all three of those. So we have about 300 plus spaces right now. We have more or less under reservation, not contract, but reservation, two additional lots out there for two additional companies. We will condition those sales upon them signing the agreement that there will be cross-easement parking nights and weekends. And part of the responsibility then is that we have to make sure that those lots are cleaned after an event and that nobody is left holding the bag having to come out the next morning and clean it up. So we would like to condition the parking on that one address, the 3194, and leave those other addresses off. The balance of those addresses are B3 land, where we expect to have restaurants and shops and things that will conflict with when people are visiting there versus when these events are. So we feel like we're really, I believe we'll have over 1,000 parking spaces within 1,000 feet. And so we would like to ask you to consider changing that to just 3194 Beaumont Center Circle. Additionally, you have asked for three 8x16 handicap parking, not parking, platforms for wheelchairs to view the events. Well, I can assure you, I am very, very sensitive to handicap. My sister Connie passed away at 70 years old last March, and she couldn't walk, she couldn't talk, she had severe cerebral palsy. I know about the need for handicap, and I can promise you that every effort will be made there. What we're asking you to do is to consider there are three pads now. One's basically in front of the stage, maybe a little bit offset. One's at kind of either side. First of all, the one that adjoins the townhouse project, one of the things that was not noted on any of these because it was somebody else's property, there are stairs on that walk to meet grade coming over there. So having a pad right beside it, that's probably not the most practical place. Secondly, it is our intention to take the entire area in front of the stage for handicapped seating. Now, we're not 100% sure how we're going to do that. It will be ADA approved, and I have no problem with meeting that. We're looking at all kinds of, I guess for lack of a better word, green, but things that are pervious that allow the water to go in as opposed to otherwise. We have found one material that is certified by the ADA to do that, and we would like to consolidate those three areas into one area. And frankly, it's about 25% larger than the combination of the three areas. And it will ultimately, when the building's built beside this, adjoining this, it will ultimately be the closest point to the handicapped parking. So what we're asking, there is an additional road, a small piece, 500 or 600 feet of majestic drive that is to be constructed contemporaneous with the construction of the amphitheater. We are asking if you would consider letting us paint on the street six handicapped spots. we will go ahead and put the sidewalk adjacent to these on-street handicapped spots, and we will put three ramps, ADA-approved ramps, up to these sidewalks so that each two cars would have one space in between them to get people up in a wheelchair. and then they're still immediately closest to the handicapped platform, if you will. One of the conditions is a turnaround. And is it all right if I approach the group to show you a picture? Is that something we put on the overhead or is it too large? Can you? Thank you. I called it Moondance because it's perfectly a circle. It looked like the moon when we did it. But with the request of the Planning Commission, yes, that does it. With the request of the Planning Commission, we added kind of two wings, if you will, to that circle that are in green. Your conditions have asked us on a temporary basis. is there a way to point thank you sir you'll need to point at that one okay your condition is that there become a turnaround temporary right in the area off of midnight pass now Now, Midnight Pass is an extension of Beaumont Center Parkway where you enter from Harrodsburg Road. So you're going to go directly across Beaumont Circle onto Midnight Pass. The difficulty in having this, in our opinion, first of all, it's at the extreme opposite end of where we want to place the handicap platform. Secondly, if, and it's a sad indictment on this, but everyone has seen people who run to the grocery store and pull out their handicap tag and put it in their perfectly capable people, but they take advantage of things. We fully anticipate that since these are grassed areas in these, so people will be bringing blankets and maybe picnic coolers or lawn chairs. We anticipate that all kinds of people will try to unload there and keep the handicapped people from being able to get into it. Secondly, if you enter and you come up and then you make, you're going to have to turn across traffic to get into this area. And then to get out, you either have to come out, go back all the way to Beaumont Center Circle and around to where the primary parking is going to be back in here. Or you're going to have to try to cross traffic again to get going back on to Midnight Pass to get around and ultimately come in from this direction. We think it's a real conflict with the traffic pattern. And if you would, let's see, can you move it? I don't know which way. That way just a little bit? Yeah. Just another few inches. Okay. Perfect. and understanding that all handicapped vehicles are accessible from the right. So you have to be pointed in that direction, going in that direction. What we're asking for is to allow us to take this 150-foot strip, temporarily paint it, add the three crosswalks, bring the folks through. This is an access road. I think it's 12 feet wide. It will have bollards at the entrance for every performance, but it allows us to get equipment to the back of the stage where there will be props and, I guess, musical instruments and things could be stored. Plus, right here is the dumpster pad. And so this is going to be an ideal situation to get people ultimately from this corner right here. We will make this connection when a building is built. But right now, we will have a sidewalk go straight to this, come straight in, and these are where the handicapped ramps are. So they can get right to this area, which is where we're proposing to put the handicap. Mr. Haymaker, I'm right here. Yes. Excuse me for interrupting you. This is a really admirable project. I'm wondering, with all of these changes that are going on, why you haven't worked out the details with planning staff so that they could have these incorporated into the application and we wouldn't have to find out right now whether they agree with all of this? I've got to tell you, I wondered the same question. I got your report and I thought, oh, my goodness, why hasn't this been worked out? But when EA Partners handed me the application and I received mine Thursday, I started moving as fast as I could to try to get this thing resolved. Would you like a 30-day postponement so you could work it all out and come in here for an easy pass? I'd like to start. I really need to get started. I'm not going to get it finished by the end of this year so that it can be functional for next year. If I don't do it, it's going to be a mud puddle. So I'd ask your consideration. Well, we'll do the best we can, but we're going to have to get staff's opinion on all of this. I fully understand, and I'm willing to make it kind of subject to. Mr. Haymaker, do you have any other changes to the recommendations that you want to make? It was... Tell us everything you need to tell us. to consolidate the handicap pads, to have the handicap parking marked on the street, and to eliminate the turnaround, the temporary turnaround up in that curve of midnight pass. I believe that pretty much does it. And we, no, I apologize to you, but we have been trying to get this thing done for so long. our permit expires Friday for our road construction. So we're trying to get started on the road, but we don't want to start on the road until we can do them both at the same time because it's going to make a mud puddle, and we'd like to do that once instead of twice. And so I would appreciate whatever you can do for us. Thank you, sir. Mr. Gallimore, if you'd like, we'll give you a chance to respond. If there's anything you'd like to respond to. Mr. Gallimore, do you understand what he's asking? I'm certainly no traffic engineer, but you are. I'm asking if you understand what he's asking, if you think that the conditions we have are sufficient or they can be amended here today to allow what he's requesting. On-street handicapped parking is a pretty tough issue. when we talk about handicapped parking, not just talking about putting up the little handicapped parking sign. There has to be the striped unloading area for people that are limited to a wheelchair where they can actually get out of their vehicles either by mechanical means or on their own. So you're not just talking about painting stripes onto the highway and putting up a sign and calling that handicapped parking. Now you can call it something else, but just being able to do that and call it handicap parking does not comply with ADA standards. So I would hate for us to try to do something to make the facility more ADA compliant but then not go by all their guidelines. I think due to the complexity of the issue, that might be the reason that the plan was originally approved with no type of handicap parking in the proximity. and basically using the handicap parking of the adjacent buildings. And the only problem with that issue is there is a caveat in the AVA guidelines that said that handicap parking should be strategically located. And, of course, if it's a good distance away from the amphitheater, then I guess it is questionable whether or not that would be compliant with the AVA guidelines. So to be truthful with you, just seeing this for the first time just like you are today, I can't tell you if this would meet ADA specs or not. But I just want to make sure that you understand it's just not about dedicating a space on the street and calling it handicapped parking. There has to be the proper unloading area. And also various slopes taken into account, things of that nature, and all that may be compliant. I cannot tell that from here. The other concern that I have is the way that that parking is outlined. It's starting right at the back end of that curve. I don't know if that geometry works very well. I can see some instances to where cars may come around that curve, and if there's not enough width, then they're just going to run right into the back of a parked vehicle. It may be that those spaces can just be shifted away from that curve a little bit, or it may be that in order for this to actually work, that it would take some geometry changes in the vicinity of that intersection. I really don't have any of the dimensions or anything of that nature to go by. We had mostly concentrated on trying to look at something along Midnight Pass, which I understand the African reasoning not for wanting to do that, but I was better prepared today to talk about alternatives along Midnight Pass as opposed to Monarch. But I'm not saying Monarch will not work. But in either place, we had also even discussed rather than having dedicated handicapped spaces, is maybe we would actually strike what we would call unloading areas. And that's where if someone were handicapped, they could be possibly dropped off or picked up at those unloading areas. And then the vehicle itself actually parked in the off-site parking. As you probably know, one of the things that complicates this a little bit, most of the time when we have a structure, we have at least some on-site parking to work with and then maybe some of the overflow parking is rented off-site. This is a very unique scenario to where you basically have no on-site parking as the original proposal. Thank you, Mr. Gellin. I had a question here. Is the property where it's a property that's in the parking lot? Well, why don't you ask a word? Mr. Haymaker, there's a property that's showing up there that's parallel to where you've got the handicap parking. that here? No, on the other side. Yeah. What's that plan to be? An office building. It is known for a professional office, and that's where the permanent... Well, can you put more handicap parking in there? I mean, I don't know. You know, that's just a question. We're trying to help you out here. See if we can get the handicap parking there that's what you need for... Yeah, when this building is... That's not developed. Yeah, when this building is built, there will be six handicap parking spaces right here dedicated it's just that the building's not built and this even this and when when they talk about this these are just temporary nature and i you know i don't want to get into comparisons but i'm going to uh we've gone to the arboretum we've gone to woodland park where the ballet's set up we've gone to uh ekton park there are 41 spaces for everybody at ekton park we're going to have a thousand we'll have the ramps we'll have the pads there are no pads at acton park there are no pads at the arboretum there are no pads at woodland park we're doing everything we can to make this work i'm i'm willing to certainly this entire sidewalk is going to be built if if it's more comfortable and and i have to admit i ask the same question because you know The radius is you're turning into where people would be. We can move this down. We were just trying to accommodate it by getting it as close as possible, but we'll mark it, and if there's a way to do it, with your permission, we could do cones or temporary cones or something that would kind of flag you're in an area. The purpose of having these cars load on that particular side of the sidewalk is that all ADA-compliant cars have right-hand doors for loading and unloading. So they could pull directly up to the curb and unload right there on the curb and onto the sidewalk and in. I'd be happy to put that anyplace, not forgetting, of course, that there are handicapped spots in all these buildings. but it's just a little further away. I'm just trying to make it as close as possible. I would also like to say, I forgot to say this, this whole area will be a park. It'll be a beautiful park next to the amphitheater. And I don't know if you've seen our amphitheater yet, but I'd be happy for you to look at it. Let me put it on the seal. Could I ask a question? Sure. The adjacent lot where you're saying there could be six handicapped parking spaces, is there any timing to that? Well, no. I don't have a buyer for that lot yet. Would it be possible to just do enough paving in there to put in the six handicapped parking spaces? Well, it would, but I'd rather put the money into something else. But, I mean, could it be done? It just seems like that kind of would solve a lot of problems. That would give you the proximity of handicap parking. That would not let us worry about issues in the street. You may have a lot of people who want to park on the street for this event. So I've just. Would you consider a lesser spec than just a typical road spec if we did something like that? Mr. Haymaker, I have a question not related to parking. If we can go back to the previous drawing. Didn't come up very good. Sorry. You've got the amphitheater there in the circle. Now, immediately adjacent to it on the left. This? well closer in right outside those two lots there what what's your plan for those two lots um those are green space buffers between the townhouse community and the edge of the amphitheater and frankly i've uh i have an agreement with the mike warner warner built homes to to put a rather dense tree line in a 30-foot landscape easement for like Leland Cypress or something that really could, even though they're heavily in favor of this, let me misrepresent them, they want this to happen quickly, but it would maybe take some noise pollution and some light pollution away from the very fronts of those. Because these particular townhouses that I'm highlighting, the front doors are what go up to that green space. And it's about 85 feet from the front door to where the trees are. But just so I'm clear, those two lots are designated 101 on my drawing. Those are both green spaces. There won't be any development. Absolutely. Thank you. I even looked at trying to do a pull-off temporarily into this access road, but it really gets complicated if you're trying to get people to pull in, and then they'd have to back up and come out, and you've got to wait for a second one to pull in and back up and come out. It got very complicated trying to do it on that access road. All right. Mr. Gallimore, if we put an additional condition in there or amend maybe a couple of the conditions that we are granting this permission subject to approval by your office. For the handicap. Well, for all the parking. Subject to what you can work out with Mr. Haymaker. Would that make you any more comfortable with this plan? Well, I think probably I would just like to have the option to where if we cannot find a workable handicap solution, then we'll just go back to what the Planning Commission agreed to and that there's no on-site handicap parking. Because I'm not so sure what offers on the table at this point are going to be viable. We also thought about the small access road that was already proposed of having 90-degree handicap parking off of that. That would probably work, but that road would have to be widened and the sidewalk would have to be installed, and, you know, it starts propagating. The other thing to think about, too, I would feel more comfortable with this project, which I think Mr. Haymaker indicated would happen, is if when that adjacent lot is developed, that there would be six handicap spaces along that side that were ADA compliant accessible to the amphitheater. Absolutely. You can have that today. That's our plan. We've never had a plan any other way than that, than the six handicap would be absolutely adjacent to the amphitheater. All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Gallenbor. What's the pleasure of the board? Do you want to take a stab at working this out today? What about over here? I'd like to see us try to get this thing worked out as well. I'd like to see it subject to him. Ms. Boland, do you think you can assist us? No, I don't think so. Hold on just a second. Condition 5 addresses the other properties that are to be used. That is one. Yes. Yes, ma'am. And then in number one would be the drop-off area, the five-foot sidewalk, and the three pads being consolidated into one. We would eliminate the drop-off area at midnight pass. Yes, it's a four-foot sidewalk. Yeah, it was a four-foot sidewalk. That's true, yes. Of at least six handicapped parking spaces within 100 feet of the subject property to be worked out to the satisfaction of traffic engineering? Is that what you were planning on for now, trying to come up with just someplace to have six spaces, or were you talking about having the ability to just say they can't be provided at this time? We would probably be interested in looking at some temporary handicap locations. But what my point is is if none can be found without considerable economic investment, maybe the decision would be made to wait until the suggestion of property is developed. So we could say maybe work with traffic engineering in an attempt to provide at least six handicapped parking spaces within 100 feet of the subject property, if at all possible, something along those lines? So that gives you the leeway. If you just can't work something out, then you wouldn't have to. But for sure we would get to six when the adjacent property. Well, that's in five. I think that's already there. Well, and I just want to make sure, though, that it's understood that it needs to be ADA-compliant access over to the amphitheater from those six places. Yes, absolutely. That's all built into the plan. We can't have a set of steps between the handicap parking and the amphitheater. Well, we can just add to number five, and we'll be ADA-accessible to amphitheater. Right. So we would eliminate the five-foot-wide sidewalk because you already have a four-foot on your plan. Were you amenable to also having the larger area right in front of the amphitheater in lieu of the three separate pads? Because that was one of the other things you talked about. That's probably more building inspection than traffic. You're talking about in the theater itself, the pads. He's not here. Ms. Bowling, would you like a few minutes to work on this? Should we move on to another case? Why don't we do that? I'm happy to work with you. I'll work with Jim Marks and Jim Hume and Jim Gallimore. All right. All right, so we'll continue this case until Ms. Bowling can get some suitable conditions drafted. Thank you, everyone. Let's see. I'm going to recall C2002-2. I'm wondering if anyone from the Episcopal Diocese of Lexington has shown up. Good afternoon. My name is Clint Abbott of M2D Design, and I'll be answering any questions that you may have about this project. Jim Hume was involved. I kept kind of in touch with him throughout the process of trying to square this away, so he may need to answer some questions, but if we get to that point, we can do whatever we need to do. Your name is Clint Abbott? That's correct. Mr. Marks, can you shoo? Okay. All right. I think, Mr. Abbott, since Mr. Hume is working on the previous case, we'll just let you take a seat and call another case. Thank you for being here. All right. We'll continue the Episcopal Diocese case. We'll move on to C, 2005-53, offender funeral directors. Okay. Okay. Looks like we're handicapped by our lack of building inspectors. Okay. Well, how about we just take a 10-minute recess? We'll be back at 20 after. We'll be back at 20 after. Thank you. All right. We're going to reconvene the July meeting of the Lexington and Fayette Board of Adjustments. Would everyone take their seats, please? So we'll recall the C2002-2 Episcopal Diocese of Lexington case. Mr. Abbott? Mr. Hume, I told the council that you were involved in the original case, which I may not have a lot of knowledge on. I thought it would be beneficial if you were here to explain anything. as far as questions they may have. Well, I'll try to bring you up to speed. In this review process and the fact that there's been seven years between what they were originally proposed and what they propose today, the paradigm changed on what we would accept. They proposed a new layout, which is actually a lot better than what they had. It's been reviewed by everybody involved, especially engineering and Mr. Brock. I believe and I'm kind of cautious about speaking for Mr. Brock with it. It's my understanding that he wanted to make sure that the board was agreeing with my recommendation to approve it before he issued a permit. and I've got a set of plans I need to have them run over here. But the original plan allowed the diocese to exit out onto the alley next door to their property. The new plan prohibits that and controls the traffic back out onto Fourth Street. We get, I believe we actually get more parking spaces, and Jim, you can correct me if I'm wrong, get a better flow of control of traffic on that lot and just a much better layout. So I'm agreeable with it. I believe traffic is more agreeable with it because he had a large hand in this, and I feel comfortable for saying for Mr. Brock that he, pending your approval with it, would issue a grading permit. Well, I'm wondering what action we need to take today, because we were going to have a revocation hearing. And if I hear you right, you're not asking for that currently. At this point, the only thing I would like to get from the diocese is a commitment to have this project done in 60 days from today. Now, I don't know at this point if you can speak for the diocese on that. We at least have come to – we've got them – we've kind of got them in a corner. They have to comply. They're still in violation when it comes down to it. They have worked with us to get a plan approved, and at this point is pending your approval for us to go ahead and issue a permit on what they've done. So, as far as I know, there's nothing before us to approve, or are you asking us to approve the new plan that we haven't seen? That's correct. And here's the thing. Hold on. No, I know, and that's a lot. And here's what I'm saying. I'm trying to eliminate having to re-advertise this as approving a previously approved site plan. Could we achieve your objective by continuing it for 60 days? That would be fine with the caveat that they are in the process of completing the project, much like we did our trying to do with Fender Funeral Home. We will say okay, provided, you know, you're finished in 60 days. Of course, you know, what do you do? They start the project, weather changes and things get delayed. But we're moving forward with this and trying to end with the result of getting compliance. They have submitted. We have tentatively approved. We wanted to tell you that, yes, it's a positive change in what they're going to do. We're going to get compliance from them in a better way and better control over their traffic. But we're trying to avoid having to re-advertise this thing and drag it on for another three or four months. I would like to say that I think 60 days may be a bit too aggressive. We will probably help the diocese in choosing a contractor. It may even go out to bid. That process will take some time. But I think this could be done within 90 days. Landscape and everything. Yes. Because that's the whole objective is to get compliant completely with parking, lighting, if any, and landscape. Okay. Weather permitting, of course, as you mentioned. Right. So if I'm understanding everyone correctly, you're, on behalf of the diocese, you're going to agree to have this project turnkey complete within 90 days. And if not, then you'll be on terms to have a revocation hearing. And since the Reverend that was here last time stipulated that you were not in compliance, the revocation hearing won't take long. Unfortunately, I tried to get a hold of some folks at the Diocese Center to appear today. I'm simply their design engineer. I do not know their financial status. I don't know if they – surely they have the money to do this project, but I take some – I hate to speak in their behalf and state, yes, for sure we can get this done in 90 days because I'm simply the guy that's drawing up the plans and trying to help them with compliance with the city. I don't know these financial issues that could affect them. All right. Thank you. What's the pleasure of the board? Do you want to continue 90 days or 30 days? I have no idea. It looks to me like we have to send it. Well, we can just, no, because if they don't get it done, then we'll get to send it. Continue with that. Okay. Any other questions or discussion? Mr. Hume, you have anything additional? I have a set of plans at the office. I'm going to try to get a runner to bring over if you would feel better to look at them so you'll know what you're approving, or you can trust me. Technicality, Mr. Hughes. Would anybody feel more comfortable having a look at the plans before we have a motion to vote? Not necessarily. I don't think we're approving your plans here today. We're just going to grant them a 90-day continuance on this revocation hearing. And that's fine. And Rochelle brought up a point that looking at the conditions, one condition was ORS amended and approved by the necessary parties. And we've all looked at it, and we're very comfortable. As a matter of fact, we're probably more comfortable now than we were seven years ago, other than the fact it's been seven years. So it's really at your discretion on how much pressure you want to put on them to revoke their license or their conditional use. And I will support that also. Thank you, Mr. Hume. Any other questions or discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Well, I'll move that we continue this case for 90 days. Second. All those in favor of Mr. Griggs' motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Mr. Griggs, is that for the purpose of coming into compliance? Yes. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Abbott. Our next case is C2005-53. Oh, okay. Ms. Bolin, are you ready for the Haymaker case? Mr. Marks? We're ready. Okay. That one first. Then I will back up and recall CV 2009-40 Haymaker Development. I'm going to put the revised condition number one up on the overhead. Can you all read that okay? The amphitheater shall be constructed and operated in accordance with the submitted application and a revised site plan as needed after working with traffic engineering to attempt to provide at least six handicapped parking spaces within 100 feet of the subject property, if practical at this time, and also providing an ADA-compliant paved seating area for handicapped persons directly in front of the stage in a minimum area of 600 square feet. All right. Any questions or discussion? We also have revisions to condition number five. Oh, okay. Yeah, I'll read this one to you. Go back just a little bit. Okay, condition five will read as follows. At such time that any of the adjoining property, currently known as 3194 Beaumont Center Circle, is developed by the appellant or another entity, off-street parking spaces on that property, and make that change, shall be shared with the amphitheater. Priorities shall be given to providing up to six handicapped parking spaces on that portion. of 3194 Beaumont Center Circle that immediately adjoins the north and east sides of the subject property and will be ADA accessible to the amphitheater. If I could make one suggestion, I think it should be, shall be given to providing at least six handicapped parking spaces instead of up to. So I'm not clear, Mr. Marks. So the only address where there will be mandatory non-handicapped parking is going to be 3194? That's correct, which is a very large property, I think Mr. Haymaker indicated. It's actually, what, six? Mr. Haymaker, would you step back to the podium, please? The 3194, what is the use of that building? It's empty development property. Let's see then. What is the zone to be used for? Professional office. So do you anticipate parking to be utilized in the evening for that property? Yes. And we will have written agreements with the people that buy the property that that's allowed. Well, let me make sure that you understand me. Will the, not the amphitheater, but will the tenants of 3194 be utilizing parking in the evening? There will occasionally be some, but generally by 5 or 6 o'clock, it might be 5 or 10 percent of the people left. But you're talking about a really large amount of parking, at least 1,000 spaces within 1,000 feet of here. Once 3194 is completed into probably five office buildings, what you may want to do is put the 31 as currently known. Yeah, it already says it, currently known as 3194. Because once we divide that up, you'll have five or six different addresses other than 3194. I think when it starts out any of the adjoining property currently known as, that probably would give that impression, I think. Okay. So where, in relation to the amphitheater, is 3194 Beaumont? Is it immediately adjacent to it? It is contiguous to, about three acres are contiguous to the amphitheater. than Monarch Street, you cross Monarch Street, and then there's about four acres directly across Monarch Street. Would you like to see a picture of it? We've got something coming up here that might help a little bit. We need to back up a little bit. Other way. Oh, yeah. Okay, that's good. Here's the amphitheater site here. 3194 is all this. I went past the B3 boundary right in there. Yeah, that's the boundary right there. Yeah. Right in there. The Whitaker Bank building is actually one lot that's already coming out of 3194, and that's a 30,000 square foot building with 130 parking spaces so you can kind of get the scale of how much more can be done there. All right. Thank you, sir, and thank you, staff. Any other questions or discussion? Okay. If there's no other questions or discussions, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move that CV 200940 Haymaker Development Company appeals for a conditional use permit to construct and occupy an outdoor theater and variances to, One, reduce the required setback from a residential zone from 1,000 feet to 0 feet. Two, increase the allowable distance for required off-street parking from 300 feet to 1,000 feet in a highway service business B3 zone on property located at 956 Midnight Pass. Be approved with the conditions as set forth by the staff, including the changes in number one and also the editing of number five. Second. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo and Ms. Edwards. Now, I don't think I asked you this, Mr. Haymaker. You had an opportunity to review the changes to the original conditions? Yes. What we just did? Yes. Yes, sir. Yes. Are you satisfied with those conditions? Yes, I am. Do you agree to abide by those? Yes. Okay. Any other questions or discussions? Okay. Then I'll call for a vote for Mr. Stumbo's motion. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, nay. Motion passes. Good luck to Mr. Stumble. I mean, Mr. Maymaker. Sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Love to you. All right. All right. I'll take it. All right. Mr. Murphy, sorry for the false alarm earlier. We're calling C2005-53, Fender Funeral Directors. I think we have everyone here. I think we do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Dick Murphy representing James Fender and Fender Funeral Directors. And this was before you last month. and last month you had approved a plan for us to complete, and we had told you we thought we could do that within 30 days. If you've been out there, you know it's not been done. And I just want to give you some background. And Mr. Fender had obtained a bid for doing the work based upon one of the preliminary plans that Sarah Tuttle of Strand had prepared. and two days before the hearing we got a Mr. Gellimore requested some additional paving, which we agreed to, to allow a two-lane entrance off of Russell Cave Road, which we are not contesting. We agree is needed so that you can come in and go out without blocking the driveway. That plan, Mr. Fender had gotten a bid for $11,000 to do the original plan. The bid for the new plan came up to $21,000, and he simply hasn't gotten the money together to complete the work in the last 30 days. What we're proposing, and he's making an effort to do that, but just money's tight for everyone, and it's tight for him too, and hasn't been able to come up with the money to do it. He has rebid it and gotten a slightly lower bid from another company, which he may use. And I want you to know that we fully understand the importance of this. We understand the importance of complying with conditions and agreements that are made to you all, and we do not contest the issues about the plan that was approved. We agree to that, and Mr. Fender is going to stick by that. What we're requesting is this. If you could give us a two-month continuance on this with the agreement by Mr. Fender that during that time he would not conduct funerals or visitations on this property. So he could not do that until he gets his work done. What that will mean is it will have an effect on his business, but we understand the issue about having the paving done. He does do some of the services at churches and other locations off-site. It would allow him to continue to do that to try to get some income in so that he could go ahead and get the paving done on that. But in the meantime, if you would grant a continuance on this, we would not conduct funerals or visitations on this site on the property because we realize the need for getting this work done. I did discuss this yesterday with staff and Mr. Hume, and I think people are in agreement with the concept of that. All right. Thank you, Mr. Hume. Any comments? No, I agree. We had a good conversation, and I told him that he understands the gravity of the possibility of losing his conditional use, and I'm pretty sympathetic to the cause, even though we're four years down the road. Do you feel he's making a good-faith effort to try to comply with the? I think so. He had a contract to the prior approval, and things just caught up with him. So, yeah, I think he's trying. But I think, much like the diocese, we've come down to the last mile here. So I think he realizes that revocation is a high possibility here. So he's got some incentive. And the fact that he's not going to use the facility, they agreed to that pretty readily. Well, would you be opposed to the continuance if he were to continue to be allowed to use the facility? Oh, absolutely not. I mean, he's got to finish before he can use the facility, if I understand you correctly. All right. Very good. Any questions or discussion from the board? Well, if not, I'll entertain a motion. I move we continue C-2005-53 offender funeral directors for 60 days, subject to the non-use of the facility for that time period. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Do I have a second? I second. All those in favor of Ms. Meyer's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? I abstain. Okay, so we have one abstention and one nay, and then three yays. So the motion passes. See you in two months. Thank you very much. Good luck to you. Next case is C2009-36, Gerald Johnson. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Would you state your name, please? My name is Gerald Johnson. Okay. Thank you for being here. The staff has recommended approval of your case subject to five conditions. Have you reviewed those conditions? I have. Do you agree to abide by them? I do. Any questions or discussion concerning this application? Let's see. If not, then I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, I recommend that C2009-36 Gerald Johnson appeals for a conditional use permit to establish a home occupation, career, and finance coaching in a single-family R1E zone on property located at 2813 Michelle Park and Council District 2 be approved as recommended by staff subject to the five conditions as set forward. Thank you, Ms. Edwards. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, Mr. Tumbo. All those in favor of Ms. Edwards' motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Okay. Motion passes. Thank you. Good luck to you, sir. Next case is C-2009-38, Hope Center, Inc. Afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board of Adjustment. I'm Walter May, attorney for the Hope Center, and I also have with me Kevin Warner from Carmen and Cecil Duns here, executive director. Well, there were objectors here for that one. Yeah, with the ones where there's no objectors, we take them first. Sorry, I didn't explain it to you. Mr. May? Yes. Thank you. The staff's recommended approval subject to four conditions. As we have reviewed, those conditions are in agreement with them. You might have said that. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. All right. Any questions or discussions by the board? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Ms. Chair, I move that KC200938 Hope Center, Inc. appeals for a conditional use permit to construct and occupy a community center in a light industrial I-1 zone on property located at 299 West Loudoun Avenue, Council District 1, be approved as recommended by the staff and subject to the four conditions laid forth by the staff. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. All those in favor of Ms. Meyer's motion? I'd like to second that. I'll second that motion. Thank you for taking care of me, Mr. Stumbo and Mr. Griggs. All those in favor of the seconded motion, may signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? All right. Motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the board, thank you. Now, has the applicant arrived in A2009-41, Larry Hamilton? Here, Mr. Hamilton. All right. Would you come forward, please? Hello. Would you state your name for the record, please? I'm Larry Hamilton, and I live at 690 East Loudoun Avenue. Now, when we called this case originally, there were no objectors. Are there any objectors here now? Okay. The staff has recommended approval subject to two conditions. Have you reviewed those conditions, sir? Yes, sir. Do you agree to abide by them? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Is there any questions or discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Ms. Chair, A2009-41 Larry W. Hamilton appeals for an administrative review to allow the construction of an additional 648-square-foot garage in a single-family residential R1C zone on property located at 690 East Loudoun Avenue in Council District 1 be approved as recommended by staff subject to the two conditions. Is there a second? Is there a second? I second that, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. All those in favor of Ms. Edwards' motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? All right. Motion passes. Thank you, guys. I appreciate it. All right. All right. Good luck to you, sir. So I believe that concludes the cases where there were, where the staff recommended approval and there were no objectors. 250. So we'll start back at the head of the agenda. and go to V2009-45, David and Mary Rose Martin. Are you the Martins? Yes, come forward to the podium. I believe in cases where we have recommendation of disapproval, we allow the staff to go first to explain why they've recommended disapproval. And you'll get a chance to respond to that once they've completed their presentation. Some slides go in here. This is a variance request intended to allow a carport that was added on to the right side of the residence to allow where it was constructed. This is a view from Eldamere Road looking at the front of the residence. The carport's on the right there. Right in here, this is an R1C zone that has a side yard requirement of 8 feet. since the carport's attached to the principal residence. That 8-foot side yard requirement applies to the carport. The carport extends at least up to the property line, so they've requested that that 8-feet requirement be reduced to 0 feet, basically eliminating the required side yard. The next shot will show a little closer up of the carport that was added right in here. Our main concern with this, well, there's several, but to start out with the whole idea of special circumstances. We really couldn't find anything especially unique about the property to justify a total elimination of the side yard. The justification provided by the applicant pretty much centered on, from their perspective, that this was the only reasonable location to add a carport. So our concern with that is that such a justification of that nature would have very broad applicability to other properties, not just in this neighborhood but all over Fayette County. If that's all it comes down to, basically anyone can come up with that argument that that's like the only spot left or the most reasonable spot. So certainly the absence of anything especially unique about the property is a concern and the broad applicability of that as a precedent. In terms of the actual neighborhood, this type of addition really is not in character with what you find in this neighborhood. You don't find extensions of this type up to property lines. The next shot will show at least the next, or the next two will show the adjoining properties. This is a carport on the property to the left of the subject property showing a carport. It's off the side property line several feet. On the other side of the property to the right, you see a single family, a single attached garage, no carport at all. If you can just imagine approving this particular request, applying that to those two properties, what would you have? You'd have a carport being added on to the right side there up to a property line. So cumulatively, we think this has a pretty significant possibility of, you know, impacting the character of the neighborhood over time. So staff just can't support this request. We've identified actually four findings for disapproval in the staff report that show up on your agenda as well. Thank you, Mr. Marks. Any questions for Mr. Morris? Jim, I have a question for you. Is the ground under the carport paved as well? Yes, and I think it was actually paved, I don't know how long it was paved before they added the carport, but as we've discussed with building inspection, that's not the pavement that's an issue. If they removed the carport, I don't think they'd have to remove the pavement. So it's okay to put paved parking in the side yard? As long as it's not also in a front yard or a side street side yard, then that's okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Mr. and Mrs. Martin, I'm not sure. I just don't recall if you identified yourself with a wreck. I'm David Martin. Thank you. I'm Mary Rose Martin, a homeowner at 1111 Eldamere. Thank you for being here. Would you like to respond to Mr. Marks' remarks? Yes, I would. First of all, I'd like to thank Mr. Pitts and his attorney, Mr. Martin, for meeting us in the hallway. And I think we've gone over some of his disagreements we had. And if I may put some photographs and talk. Absolutely. I've got several. And I promise you there's none of the beach or kids or anything. That first one shows the unique landscaping. We have the bur oak, the ornamental grasses, which hides the carport. And there are several photographs that you'll go through. That's from another angle. As you can see, the landscaping pretty much conceals the carport. Getting closer and coming up the driveway. Okay, there is the carport there. One of the unique situations here is that the adjoining property's eight-foot privacy fence, which to my knowledge is the only one in the entire neighborhood. So that obviously blocks the, you know, the side view to their yard or any fence. Can I ask a question about that last one? I see a downspout on your awning. Where does that spill out? That downspout, I'm glad you brought that up. Since that fence has gone up, there's been a bad erosion problem there. From the water running off the driveway, grass will not grow there. So there's a downspout. There's a gutter and a downspout which diverts the water back onto my driveway which allows the water to run away and down to the street, which I don't think is going to help grass to grow but should stop the eroding problem we've had. I've had to replace the dirt. Before we put the car part poured up, it was water running off. You know, the driveway would slope away, obviously, like byways are. It would run off the driveway. But your driveway is forgetting the erosion? Well, it's the fence, which was installed after the driveway. blocks the sun so grass will not grow there. I have noticed, I've got recent photographs with recent rains to where the downspout in the gutter is working to divert the water. And the water now hits the driveway and runs down the driveway. So perhaps even some pea river gravel or something there now would stay in place. I've got to give credit for these first photographs. James Arshambo, a friend of mine, took them. I'm not that great of a photographer. These photographs show the eight-foot fence and how the eight-foot fence, how it's behind the eight-foot fence. It's not touching the fence. One other thing I add, I did not intentionally put it up without a permit. I asked the contractor to put it up if a permit was required. And it was explained to me, no, that it's a temporary structure. There are no posts in the ground. There are four two-inch square aluminum posts which are held to the existing driveway with U brackets which are held with a tab con, which is a screw which goes into the concrete. And then there's a channel which is attached in the mortar joint of the garage which the panels slide in. Basically, this is one of these three season patio rooms without the sides or the ends or the doors or anything. It's a lightweight styrofoam metal. panel which has a fire rating and somewhat of a load rating. The neighborhood actually is full of car ports. It's full of cars, detached garage. I'd like to show a photograph of what gave me the idea to do this, which is just about four houses away, four or five houses away. And then there's a couple of other properties with zero variance. Now that would be considered permanent, I would think, because those posts are actually in the ground and concrete. But you understand the difference with this one I'm here in front of you. Between this and yours is that, and that's legal I assume, because the side yard still exists beyond the carport. The problem with yours isn't how it looks. It's that it's on your side yard. I have no side yard. There's an eight-foot fence. There's a driveway and then an eight-foot fence. Well, I guess the paved area that's underneath your carport is your side yard. It's between your garage and the fence. that's your eight-foot side yard, and now you've put a structure on it. That's the problem. So it's not really comparable to this application. Okay. And those are just examples of a zero clearance on the right in the neighborhood. This photograph. And, again, I guess there's no side yard there. Is there anything else? My wife would like to speak. I just want to reemphasize, maybe these photographs will show the erosion that has occurred since the fence has gone up. You know, the fence blocks sunlight and then the water runs off the driveway and washes the dirt. Mr. Martin. Yes. Do you have any pictures of your backyard? I do. I mean, there's discussion, there's been discussion in our report about your backyard. Yes. This is why it's not feasible to put it in the back. This is the gate, as you see in the background, it's the carport. This is standing in the backyard. You'll notice a weeping mulberry tree there. This is coming on back. That is a storage area shop which is attached to the garage. It is a ornamental stamped concrete sidewalk which comes around. There is also a mature pine tree. There's just not enough room to turn a vehicle back there to make the turn safely. You'll show the next one please. one at the back of the house. That one. Then there's a yellow wood. That's the garage we're speaking of to the left. That's our sunroom and a patio. I just wouldn't see putting putting a carport in the middle of your backyard when the driveway is right there to the side. All right. Thank you. Thank you for listening to us today. Thank you. David and I are here to ask for your approval of our variance appeal in order to retain the detached carport at 1111 Eldermere Road. We have resided as a family for the past 17 years. We live with our two wonderful sons at this property, which is a family dwelling for us. It's not rental property. The carport was inadvertently put up without a building permit this spring. We unfortunately were mistaken in this requirement because we were ignorant and unaware that a temporary structure such as the carport needed a permit. We did build the carport in good faith and out of necessity to provide protective coverage for an additional car, which our teenage son has recently started to drive. The carport will also provide me with the convenience of not having to scrape the vehicle of ice and snow during inclement weather when I'm called into work as a registered nurse at the University of Kentucky Medical Center. As a mother and a pediatric nurse, I am a child and safety advocate, not only for my sons, but also for our entire neighborhood. We would never do anything that would jeopardize the public health, safety, or welfare of our neighbors. When we built the carport, both our families' and neighbors' health and safety were a concern of ours. By placing the carport on the side of the house rather than the rear or front helps protect our two sons and their neighborhood friends from potential injury as they play basketball in the front of our driveway, and there would be less need to maneuver vehicles in and out of the garage and the driveway. Also, our fenced-in backyard provides a safe haven for our sons and friends to play in. We do have special circumstances unique to our property, we feel, that include an already existing eight-foot high fence along the side of our house where the carport was placed. This type of eight-foot side fence, stockade fence, is not typically seen on other properties in our neighborhood. This 8-foot side yard fence does not stop at the back face of the house at 1115 Eldamere Road, but it extends toward the front yard about 7 feet from the front face and corner of that house. This 8-foot high fence hides the car and the carport from view, and it also acts as a barrier to provide additional safety and protection. Another special circumstance to our property does include the fabulous mature trees and 17 years' worth of landscaping in our rear yard. We did not want to remove these trees as we considered them to be of important value to the neighborhood. The carport is not intrusive to our neighbors and was built within our property line as we know it. being on the side of the house, both the additional car and carport are scarcely visible, blending in and well hidden by the side fence and landscaping grasses and trees in the front yard. We feel that this provides less of an eyesore and impinges less on the neighborhood with increased focus on the landscaping and beautification. The carport is beneficial to the neighborhood because it's an improvement which would enhance the property value of the neighborhood. Many of our neighbors who are original homeowners and have lived in the neighborhood over 40 to 50 years support our application for a variance and do not believe that the carport adversely impacts our neighborhood or alters the character of our neighborhood. We appreciate your time and understanding and considering approval for our appeal. I do have a petition here, and five of the names on it have lived in the neighborhood for almost 50 years, some of them over 50 years. One is here today in support of, I don't know, they're not objecting to the carport at all if you'd like to see this. Sure. So now, does that conclude your presentation? Yes. Okay. So we'll hear from building inspection and from any objectors and supporters, and then you'll get a chance to respond if you wish. Thank you. Mr. Hume? Thank you. is and ask that you uphold the staff's recommendation. Now, I recall what they stated, that their builder told them that a permit was not required because it was a temporary structure. Is there any truth to that? Mr. There's nothing temporary about it. It's secured to the house and secured to the ground. That's not temporary. So that's a… Mr. That's not true. That's just wrong. Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Hume? All right. We'll hear from the objectors now. Sure. Absolutely. Thank you. After the objectives, how about that? Sure. Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the Board. My name is Ted Martin. I'm an attorney at the law firm of Greenbaum, Don McDonald. I'm here on behalf of Greg and Ann Marie Pitts. They own the properties located at 1119 Eldermere Road and 115 Eldermere Road. 1115 Eldermere Road is the property adjacent to Mr. Martin's property, the one that has the fence that has been referenced several times already. I've reviewed the staff's recommendation of disapproval. Of course, we strongly agree with that recommendation, and I apologize. If I'm going to reiterate some of what they've already said, feel free to stop me at any time if you want me to continue to a different part of my argument. First of all, in looking at the factors that are to be considered in this variance request, we believe the circumstances surrounding the variance request are the direct result of Mr. Martin's own actions as he built this carport without first obtaining a building permit in violation of the Kentucky Building Code and the LFUCG Code of Ordinances. Also, this property is located in an R1C zone, which requires a minimum side yard of 8 feet. As shown by the survey, we have attached a tab one. And I apologize, it's a big survey we folded down. But I think it's been established today that the carport does reduce the side yard to zero feet. And based upon the survey that we have conducted, it actually extends over that side yard into the property owned by the pits at 115 Eldemere Road. So we have communicated to Mr. Martin that this is a trespass onto the property. We've attached a copy of our letter to him dated July 29, 2009 at Tab 3 and asked that he remedy that situation by August 10, 2009. We've also learned, based upon this survey and the plat attached to tab 2, that there is a 10-foot utility easement on this side yard right here. Five foot on one side of the property, five foot on the other side of the property. We're not aware that any of the accroachment agreements have been entered into by any of the utility companies allowing the construction of this carport over a utility easement. And we believe that's a requirement in order to construct a permanent structure, is that you have to get that type of agreement from the utility companies. Mr. Martin, let me interrupt you. I apologize. Is there an encroachment agreement for the fence that's been constructed there? Yes. Yes, those were all we had. When the fence was constructed, utility companies came out, marked the properties, and agreed to allow the fence to be constructed where it was. All right, thank you. Sure. We also believe granting the variance requests will alter the character of this well-established neighborhood as a zero-foot minimum side yard would essentially result in homes being built almost right up on top of each other, one after the other, and you would have no side yard between the properties. And it's contrary to the existing homes typical in this neighborhood. We also believe there are no special circumstances warranting the variance request. The carport is simply not necessary for Mr. Martin to maintain the reasonable use of his property. There's ample parking area available for the use of his cars, and a carport's not necessary for him to use the car. So he can still park the car over in that concrete area. carport essentially something that is not necessary and it's just used to protect the top of the vehicle we've attached pictures at tab four of this carport you've already seen quite a few of these but one thing if you notice from these pictures especially the first picture is the amount of space between the side of the existing home and the car that is parked underneath this carport. There's a lot of space there and we're not sure if this carport could have been constructed within the eight foot setback and been in compliance had he first gone and got a building permit. But from these pictures, it's clear that there's a lot of space there and the carport was clearly built to be extended as far as possible on his property. In addition, as you can see from the second two pictures, the carport is visible from the street. And I believe from the angles of the pictures taken by Mr. Martin, I think those are a little bit skewed in that each picture was taken at an angle where it was directly in front of a large tree or some other type of structure or plant in the yard. Finally, for your consideration, we have attached at tab five letters of objection from neighbors that are within the 200-foot perimeter from Mr. Martin's home, objecting to the addition of the carport. They feel that it would diminish the property value of granted as well as change the character of the neighborhood. Those individuals would have liked to attend this meeting, but were unable to do so. Attached at tab six are letters of objection from members of that neighborhood which live outside of the 200-foot perimeter, but who also wanted to submit letters of objection to the requested variance. And some, because the variance would alter the essential character of the general vicinity, and because granting the variance would allow an unreasonable circumvention of the zoning ordinance, there are no special circumstances warranting the variance request, and because the requested variance is a direct result of Mr. Martin's own actions, we would request the board deny the variance request. I do have Mr. and Mrs. Pitts here today, and they would like the opportunity to address the board for themselves. That's permissible. Absolutely. And is there any questions for me? I don't think so. Okay. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman and board, my name is Greg Pitts. I own one 1115 Aldermere Road, the property Mr. Martin has built his addition on. The city of Lexington has building policies and procedures that should be followed in order to prevent mishaps. Mr. Martin did not mark the property with a survey. Actually, we did the survey. Nor did he obtain a building permit. If a zero variance is granted, this would set a negative precedence in our neighborhood. I ask that you deny this request for zero variance and appreciate your consideration in this matter. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Good afternoon. My name is Anne-Marie Pitts, and we own the property 1115 Eldemere Road, which Mr. Martin has trespassed onto with his addition. When I was little and learning to sew, I was taught that you must measure twice and cut once. This same theory holds true for the building profession. Even though Mr. Martin is a builder, he did not follow this principle. No survey was done and no permit was obtained before his addition was constructed. As a mother of six children, I've learned that you don't reward bad behavior. We ask that you not award Mr. Martin with a zero variance. This would set a bad precedent in our neighborhood. If the side yard setback are set at zero and homes are allowed to be built adjacent to each other, Eventually, you would see a decline in the neighborhood. Property values would plummet as well. It's a snowball effect which can be prevented with a simple denial. We appreciate your time and consideration. Thank you. Thank you both. Any questions for the pits? Thank you. Any other objectors? My name is Ed Brown. I live at 712 Mount Vernon Drive. I'm the co-president of Hollywood Mount Vernon Neighborhood Association and have lived there for almost 23 years. Of those 23 years, I've been president or co-president 16 years and on the board of directors 4. I say that only because I just want you to realize that I know where I'm speaking from when it comes to what the subvision has gone through in the past with the growth of UK and the density issues. This could set a bad precedence as far as the sidelog line and allowing growth wall to wall as far as the properties go. And that's my only concern. And as another point, I didn't come here as the president of the Neighborhood Association. I want that to be perfectly clear. We don't get in the middle of these type of issues. We leave that to you guys. You're better equipped. And so I'd like to close with that statement. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Okay. No other objectives. Would the supporter like to come forward? Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is Diane Spurlock. I live at 665 Barrie Lane, and I'm a neighbor of the Martins. And the Martins are wonderful neighbors. They are kind, considerate, and helpful to the several, three elderly neighbors that they have, taking care of them in a very considerate way. I'm familiar with the Martins' home and rental properties nearby because I walk past them every day. I want to make two points. The Martins are excellent stewards of their properties. Their older apartment building in the neighborhood, they have restored beautifully, and they've maintained and landscaped it beautifully. It shows that they are very interested in and sensitive to maintaining and improving the character and value of the neighborhood. Regarding the carport over the parking space that is the subject of the appeal, it is smaller in scale than the privacy fence next door. It's not taller than that, so it doesn't obstruct or impose on the neighbor's view. As I said, I walk past these properties every day. I walk around the neighborhood a lot. I didn't even know the carport was going up or that it was there until David told me about this appeal. It's not noticeable from the street. It does not cover any new green space. The concrete parking space was there already. So in bearing this in mind, I ask again that you approve their appeal for the variance. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Burlock. Mr. and Mrs. Martin, would you like to respond to any of the comments that have been made by staff or the objectors? In regards to the carport impinging on the neighbor's property at 1115, we have previously had our property surveyed, and as we know it, it does not, it's within our property line. We were kind of blindsided yesterday by a UPS from Greenbaum, Dahl, and McDonald saying that our driveway was over the line. So I personally, Alan Thompson came by my house personally at 1130 this morning and just said that, no, the driveway is fine. it's not over the and here's a letter I'm just saying that my driveway is it's not trespassing that's okay we're not here for the driveway I think I don't think that's an issue before us okay all right anything else okay all right Thank you. I have a question for Mr. Hume. I just have a question, Mr. Martin. What profession are you in? I do remodel. So you're in the construction business, and you didn't realize this made it up for men? I did. That's why I asked. Okay. Also, I talked to one of the building inspectors. He said it didn't have sides, didn't have ends. And I said, are you sure? And then I asked the contractor. I do. I have a question for Mr. Hume. Mr. Hume, is it my understanding that if they took the carport off, that they could still use the concrete pad for parking? That's correct. They could. Now, this is about the structure. Well, and it appears by the photos, too, and Mr. Martin, correct me, is it wired? Does it have a light? Is that a light fixture on the ceiling of it? There's a light fixture there. It's not wired yet. All right. Any other questions or discussion? No? All right. Then I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion, Mr. Chair. All right. Mr. Griggs. Do you have something else you want to say? At the end, I have a question, maybe. I'd like to move that V2009-45, David and Mary Rose Martin's, appeal for variance to reduce the required side yard from 8 feet to 0 feet in order to retain a detached carport. Should that be an attached carport? Should be an attached carport. In a single-family residential zone on property located at 1111 Eldemere Road, be denied, disapproved for the reasons given by the staff. Thank you, Mr. Griggs. Do I have a second? I'll second that motion. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Any discussion? Mr. Martin, do you have any questions? Yes. Obviously, I've got to take it down, and I will. We haven't voted yet. Okay. All right. All those in favor of Mr. Crick's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? All right. Motion passes. Motion passes. Your appeal's been disapproved. Right. I understand that. But how long do I have? I mean, they gave me kind of threatening letters saying I have until the 10th their attorneys. That's something you need to work out with Mr. Hume. Thank you. I believe there are letters between you and them. It would be a completely different agreement between you and building inspection. I would think it would be – okay. Thank you, sir. They could be more flexible on removing it. Thank you. All right. Thank you. We don't have any right to make it. Thank you. Okay. If I'm reading my agenda correctly, We're now at C2009-37, Silas Bambania. Am I pronouncing your name correctly? That's right, Silas Bambania. I apologize. I should have explained at the beginning that the cases where there's objectors or it's where the staff has recommended disapproval, they go at the end of the agenda. That's all right. MR. I apologize. MR. My misinterstanding. Sorry. MR. Now let's see. Staff recommended approval, but we have an objector. And I think what we would do is let's hear from the objector and then let you respond if you're agreeable with that. MR. Sure. MR. Okay. MR. Hi. Hi, my name is Zara Mirzai and I live in 743 Sprucewood. And my question is, I just received a letter. And that subdivision is all residential. And I don't know about a couple miles. There's no store or nothing. all these houses. Specifically in that spruce wood is a very, very small court. It's a small court, some house that size, some this house. And most of the neighbors have between one, two young kids, which all the time they're playing. And even right now, if somebody parking the car, each side of the street is really hard to move. 717 spruce wood is way, way in the back and the way was that land and I built my house 2006 and that land was empty forever. Ball home didn't know what to do because it was just the way the land was and the way his house is is way way in the back of the court and his garage is like that so I don't have a picture or anything to show it. Yeah, it's way in the back. If the client coming, no way they can park in front of his garage. Obviously, they're going to use the back of the court. And as a neighbor, we don't know what kind of personal trainer. What kind of personal trainer? What time client are coming? Is this going to be an everyday thing? Is it music going to be involved? When we built the house in 2006, we paid extra $5,000 to Ball Home. In the back of our backyard is a city land. It's just green land, which they told us this is for city, and they cannot build anything. And like I said, Ball Home charges extra because the privacy of that land. And now I'm wondering, okay, if we pay extra for having the privacy, now a couple neighbor that side is going to be having the business. What's going to happen with the privacy? Let me get a time out here. First of all, would you spell your name for me? I'm sorry. D-A-H-R-A. D-A-H-R-A. Okay. My last name is M as Mary, I-R-Z as a zebra, A-E-I. Mirzai. Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Now, were you aware that the staff has recommended approval, but subject to six conditions, that you can't have more than four sessions per day, and they're not to take place after 7 p.m. or before 6 a.m.? And there's four others. Were you aware that the – No, I wasn't. All right. Do we have an extra set of the conditions that she can review? I think he has the agenda there. We have it here. Oh, okay. If you look at those. We didn't review prior to it. Okay. Well, have you both reviewed those? I reviewed it. He did it. I did it. Okay. Well, would you take a moment to review those? Because those might address some of your concerns. Is he going to be able to explain for us about, you know, what kind is saying personal trainer? As a neighbor, we are kind of nervous, you know, what kind of trainer. Okay, sure, we can ask him that when it's his turn to talk. Question for me? Well, I think what I'll let you do is review the conditions and see if they're not helpful to you, and we'll hear from the other objector. And, sir, would you state your name? Yeah, my name is Daywon Hong. It's spelled D-A-E-W-O-N, last name H-O-N-G. I live in 716 Sprucewood, which is right across that property, 717 Sprucewood. And my main concern is that that property, that street is really narrow to a point. If you park one car on one side and then park another car on another side, you only have a small space for one car to go in and out. It's a very narrow street. That's one thing that I want to point out. And we also have a cul-de-sac on this side. It's completely closed in. There's only one way a traffic can come in. Right. Okay, and we have, like, four houses on that side, like, built very close to each other. And then I have my house on this side. And my problem was that even when they're doing a lot of construction, if, like, a huge construction truck will come in, I can't get out. I'm just completely blocked. I can't go anywhere. I'm stuck there. Let me get time out for you. Do we have any photographs of the cul-de-sac or neighborhood? I have one of the house that doesn't really show the full cul-de-sac. We can get another plan up that shows the full cul-de-sac if that's what you want to look at. Well, if you can access that. Sure. It might be helpful to me. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to help you out. Yeah, because that's one of the points that I wanted to make. And there's only one way to come in. And the roads, so if we actually build a business, I don't know where you can really have a parking space for that. I mean, the houses are built so close to each other. A lot of times, you know, we have like a neighbor invites like friends over. Then what happens is like our mailbox get blocked. You know, those things happen too. And that's pretty frequent. I mean, that happens sometimes, you know. So, but there is no, as far as I can see, there is no space for parking at all to actually provide extra parking. because the top side is just empty lots where you can't build any kind of properties. It's like a lot that falls in like that. So you can't really expand there anymore. Okay, so is his property the... It's the corner of the cul-de-sac, right? The one that's not colored in? Yeah. I'll outline it on the other screen here. Here's the cul-de-sac ending of Sprucewood. The subject property is this lot right here. Right. And there is no extra space other than that round space. And my main concern is children's safety. A lot of kids play in that neighborhood. It's a cul-de-sac. When we bought the house in 2006, we thought it was going to be quiet, it was going to be safe because it was a cul-de-sac. But now if a property comes in, our business comes in, then we lose all those. That is my main concern. I have a 4-year-old, I have an 18-month-old, playing on the street all the time. And I don't want anything to happen to them because of increased traffic there. That's a reasonable concern. Now, does the fact that they've limited the training sessions to four per day and having the appointment times staggered so there won't be more than one car there at a time, does that help you at all, sir? I don't know how that's going to help that much. I mean, I don't know how you can. I mean, I'm a mental health professional. I deal with meeting with clients all the time. And sometimes you do have overlaps. I mean, it's not like you intentionally make an overlap, but it does happen because people tend to come in late or come in early. It does happen, and I don't know how you can control that. You're not doing this in your home, are you? No, no, no. I work for a site. I do not do this at home. All right. I want to make sure. Sure, yeah. I know that. I thought I busted you there. All right. Well, thank you. Anything else? I have a question. All right. Sorry. How many automobiles do you have? I have two, and I have a garage. But the other, right, there's another concern is that a lot of houses on this side, on this side, they have a driveway that has a slope like this, so people don't like to park on their driveways. Even, like, friends come in, they don't like to park on those driveways. So the parking is always a problem, even as it is. Okay. All right, thank you. Any other questions? No, that's good. Thank you. Thanks, sir. Now, Ms. Reza? I'm trying. Okay. I'm sorry. Did you have a chance to review the conditions? Did those help you at all? I noticed it's not going to be before 7 and 6. I noticed that. It's not going to be before 6 in the morning and not after 7 p.m. at night. But like another neighbor just mentioned, the most important is the safety of the kids because all the time the kids play over there anyhow. And the spruce wood is way in the back. You have to pass Woodhaven, which usually Woodhaven is enough traffic to come in the spruce wood. My concern is, like he mentioned, is what's going happening with the safety of the kids. And already I know about the time, the noise is another thing. Is this involving music, loud, or our backyard is, he mentioned it and I said it too, it's for city, it's green land. Is it going to be involved? The privacy is going, I don't have a fence. Is the privacy going away? Even we paid a bunch of money to Ball Home because of that privacy. And if something happened, in the paper I mentioned it, it's going by the schedule. If we saw it is not the way it should be, then we have to take action if it's not the way, saying it in this paper today. Okay. Well, what we might consider is reviewing this case after it gets started, if we do approve it, to allow you an opportunity to come back and voice your concerns should you have any. And I don't know if I've gotten that far, and I don't know if the applicant's agreeable to that, but that's something we can consider. Any questions? I do have a question. How many automobiles do you own? I have two, but we have, like I said, we have a garage. So you park your cars in your garage, but you have two cars going in and out every day? Yes, sir. Okay, thank you. All right, anything that the staff would like to add? No. All right, thank you. All right, Mr. Mohania, would you like to address the board? I'd like to stress that this is not going to be a high-intensity occupation at all. With the microphone. Yeah, it's not going to be high-intensity. I'm assuming about three or four sessions a day, all by appointment. And I'm thinking as far as car parking spaces involved, we have a long enough driveway. If a couple is coming in, they should have only one car. They'll park it on the driveway, and we do our business. It'll be within the garage. The garage doors will be closed at all times, and one hour at most. So this is something I enjoy doing. I'm going to be purchasing equipment for personal use anyway. So I'd really appreciate it if you'd be able to approve this. I want to ask Mr. Griggs' question. How many cars do you own? Two. Two. And so I presume they'd be in your driveway. With those two cars in the driveway, because they couldn't be in the garage if you were in there. Right. Would there be space for any additional cars in your driveway if your two cars were parked there? Yeah, the driveway is long enough. Even if we have both of our cars, me and my wife's, parked in the garage, we still have a long enough driveway to have at least a couple more cars to fit in there. All right. Thank you, sir. Any questions for Bohania? No? Now, let me ask you, you've heard the concerns of your neighbors. Would you be opposed to – well, first of all, let me ask if you've reviewed the six conditions that the staff has recommended. Have you reviewed those? Yes, sir. I'm in agreement. Would you agree to abide by those? Yes, sir. Now, I'm not saying we're asking you this, but would you be opposed to a seventh condition that brought us back here for a review to see how things are going after you've already set this up? Sure, yeah. No problem. You wouldn't be opposed to that? No. Okay. So is this the subject property? Yes, that's correct. As you can see, the driveway, we have a lot of space there. so you can easily feed five, six cars, I'd say, right on the driveway. Again, this is not high intensity. It's something I enjoy doing, and I enjoy helping people. And that's just a passion I have. So I'll be purchasing weights for personal use anyway. Okay. Any questions for the applicant or any discussion by the board? It might behoove you, if you do agree to a six-month review of this, that you ask your clients to park in the driveway, and then there'll be less of a chance that in six months when we're seeing how it's working out that there'll be problems with parking. I don't think we can require that they park in your driveway, but you could suggest that to them. Sure. No problem. Okay. Well, thank you. Yeah. Does the staff have any objections to a six-month review? Not at all. I just need to clarify if you want that to be just have building inspection come and give you an update as to whether or not there have been any complaints or if you want full notice to be given to all the property owners within 400 feet. Okay. All right. Thank you, Mr. Morris. It's also important that he contacts me and gets a certificate of occupancy so I can start the six-month clock on him. So when he's set up and he decides he wants to go, I can at least keep tabs on it. Right. That's condition number five. And you understand prior to doing anything, you have to get a certificate of occupancy from Bill. Yes, I think Mr. Marks is somewhere here to say that we need – yeah, that's not a problem. I do understand that. Okay. I do have a seven-month infant myself. I love kids, so I really don't think that should be a problem as far as safety and concern for kids. Like I said again, that's very professional. Probably be older clients, so be respectful enough. Any other discussion? Okay. Well, if there's no other discussion, I'll call for a motion. I guess I just assumed that would be in whoever's motion. Mr. Chairman, I move that C 2009-37. Salish Babine. I'm sorry. That's all right. It's Kay. Appeal for a conditional use permit to establish a home occupation fitness training in a planned neighborhood and residential R3 zone on property located at 717 Sprucewood Drive, Council District 9, be approved as recommended by staff and subject to seven conditions, the seventh being that the Board of Adjustment review it in six months with notification to neighbors. Second. Thank you, Ms. Meyer, Ms. Edwards. Now, do you both understand that in six months you'll get another notice telling you that we're going to have another hearing and review this. And if you have complaints, then you'll be welcome to come back and share with us your observations and complaints. Is that okay? All right. Okay. All those in favor of Ms. Meyer's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? All right. Motion passes. Good luck to you, sir. Thank you. Thank you for being here, objectors. Okay. Now, according to my agenda, the next case is C-2009-39, Gail Turner, get twisted. Good afternoon. Would you state your name, please? Gail Turner. All right, Ms. Turner. Thank you for being here. The staff has recommended approval of part of your application, disapproval of your part of it. So I think what we'll do, and we do have a, are the objectors still here? She left. Gave up. We talked outside. Okay. All right. That's why I encouraged that. So we no longer have objectors, is that correct? Okay. That helps. Okay. So now you realize the staff's recommended disapproval. Would you like to be heard on that or do you agree with staff? I would like to be heard briefly on the disapproval. Okay. Well, the way we do things here is if there's a disapproval by staff, we let them go first and then let the applicant respond. Okay. Take a second to pull up some slides here. No, Paul, if you just kind of flip through, I'll tell you when to stop. Yeah, way too fast. That's loud. Bell, Corey. If it just disappeared, I do have a hard copy, so don't panic. Okay. Okay. I thought you were going to have a live feed from the LFUCG dirigible. That's where Mr. Salee was. We're switching technology gears here. Okay. This is the shopping center, a view of the wine shop. They've asked for a conditional use permit to establish a wine bar inside the store where they can serve wine by the glass and also have background type live entertainment. So this is a picture of the front of the store. The next slide will show the traffic aisle on the backside of that part of the shopping center. This corner is where they wanted to add a 12-foot by 24-foot deck, which would be part of the wine bar where people could go out and have their wine. They're not proposing to have any of the entertainment on the outside deck. Next slide is the actual store has a drive-thru window on that side of the building. So at the location where the deck's proposed, the drive-thru would be going right through or along the side of the deck. Our main concerns with the deck are, it just seems to be, from our perspective, a kind of a poor choice for an outdoor area like that. It's along the back side where service trucks go through there. We have an aerial photo showing a large delivery truck. actually parked right along the edge of where that 2012 by 24 deck would be. The drive-through lane is an additional complication. The next slide will show right across on the opposite side of Keithshire is a residential community. So by adding an outdoor deck, you're just increasing the chance of having disturbances to that residential community. I think the one letter of concern you have being passed around is from someone who lives in that development there. So we're supportive of this request without the outdoor deck. Okay. All right. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Marks? Okay. All right. Ms. Turner. The lady that was here, the objector, I talked with her outside, and her whole, their Wellington subdivision, their concern was outdoor music. So that's why she left when I told her there wasn't going to be any outdoor music. Okay. You all wouldn't approve that. Thank you. I have affidavits from the, when you go back to the picture of the front and center, the other, there are five businesses in this section. One of the spots is vacant at the time, so there are four other businesses. They're all solely owned like me, so it's hard for them to get away from their businesses. But three of them have signed affidavits that they have no problem with me adding a deck and that it would not impede their business at all and would actually potentially bring more business to the center, which they're all up for. So I can leave those with you all. I also have 19 affidavits of patrons of my business that agree that it would be a nice addition and would also bring more traffic into the center. I better take a look at that because my wife might be on there. We did send out 240 notifications to the surrounding areas that we were having the hearing today. we have one lady show up and apparently one letter. So it doesn't seem to me like that's too much concern on anybody's part. But as for the drive-through, which I think is Mr. Mark's main concern, we have plans to reroute. There's enough room to reroute it viewing around. Most people don't go around the building anyway. When they leave the drive-through, they will go to the end and make a U-turn and go back out the way they came in. So we could put barriers up, which we would build sort of a railing around the deck anyway to keep it falling off or any such thing. But there would be a lot of notice for people that the deck is there. And we could direct traffic, for the most part, back around the way they came in. And the businesses as they exist right now do not receive deliveries in the backs of them. We receive the most deliveries, and there are steps up the back, and with the heavy stuff people bring in, they bring everything in through the front, you know, the spirit vendors and wine vendors, et cetera. So, you know, I can see that maybe there was some, at some time, maybe truck deliveries in the back of the center, but the businesses that are there now just don't get big deliveries except for me. And like I said, mine came through the front. So that's not so much of a concern as well. The other, I think, concern was having enough through way between the edge of the deck and the start of the parking spaces that are marked off in the back of the center, and I think that ended up being 46 feet, which would accommodate any large truck that did decide to go through there. And then finally, the center is a rectangular portion of that center, so there is entranceway from both ends. So if a truck did need to make a delivery to one of them, there is a separate, there's another way in to the back of the center. So there's one at each end. All right. Thank you. Mr. Gallimore, Ms. Turner, Mr. Gallimore is our local traffic genius guru. and I'm wondering if you have any comments on this. Well, I think the – I'm not quite sure. I know that delivery vehicles do navigate around the patio area. I'm not so sure if there are service doors or anything back there now where you would have to change how they actually perform their delivery. There is a concern because you do have the drive-through, but you do have quite a bit of width there, So it does look possible that you could create what we call a bulb out and kind of push vehicles from the drive-through area kind of out into the main circulation area in order to somewhat keep them away from the proposed patio area. The parking, the diagonal parking, I don't quite understand. It looks like there's enough room to have, just have that as being standard 90-degree parking. This is the way it is laid out right now. It looks like it is proposed for two-way circulation. You typically think of angle parking when you have one-way circulation. It's possible, too, that that might be another way to simplify the circulation issues rather than, I think you can get to this property all the way around, so rather than having two-way around the liquor store, just make it a one-way circulation system. And that way you would have a nice wide travel aisle and would have to be less concerned with vehicles conflicting with each other. There is things not shown on the drawing, but I don't know if there's things like solid waste containers or dumpsters or anything like that that would also have to be. Herbies. Herbies, okay. So there might be some concerns with some things like that. And, of course, you wouldn't want to just put a deck out there in a travel lane, but I think it is possible, like I said, to put a, like what you see around a lot of areas, areas, like I said, a small sidewalk corridor or something, bulbing it out at the corner to where vehicles actually couldn't run into the deck. But I don't know if the applicant may not be willing to make the investment and to make this a more safe situation. But like I said, I agree that you don't want to just set a deck right out in the middle of a travel aisle with a drive-through. All right. Thank you, Mr. Gallimore. Now, Mr. Turner, one question I had for you that I didn't ask earlier, will this deck have stairs or other way for someone to get off the deck into the rear parking lot? We would keep it low, maybe one step, and then, you know, also accommodate any handicap access that we would have to. Okay. It really is just, the purpose of it would be with the smoking ban. primarily would be for people who wanted to have a cigarette with their glass of wine to have a place to go. That's the primary reason. So at this point, you're still requesting that we approve the rear deck? Yes. I'm understanding correctly. Okay. Any questions or discussion? I did put up an aerial, Mr. Chairman. Oh, okay. Thank you. This is the end suite. This would be the area where they want to add the deck. We didn't hire a plane to go out and take this picture. So two years ago when they did the aerial photography, it just happened to be a delivery truck right there. So that's kind of why we started to get concerned about the deck at that location. One thing I would say about that is there used to be a catering business in one of the sections, and they very well could have gotten that they are no longer there. And I talked to all the owners of the other businesses, and they assured me they didn't get deliveries from large vehicle, like semi-trucks in the back area. Okay. The other thing to let you know about before I forget is there is a development plan that governs pretty much the entire building activities for this part of the shopping center. So should you all be inclined to approve this conditional use with the deck, we need to add a condition that they amend the development plan to show that additional structure. Okay. All right. I have a question for Ms. Boland. If we take the action that the staffs recommended where we disapprove the deck, would the applicant be prohibited from seeking the deck for an entire year? That's correct, unless there was a substantially different design for a deck. The board can determine that the new application is substantially different from what had been disapproved, such that it's not actually applying for the exact same thing. She could not apply for the exact same thing for a year if the board takes action to disapprove it. All right. Thank you. Mr. Chair? Yes. I was getting the opinion that Mr. Gallimore thought there might be a solution, a bit an expensive one, but maybe we could either continue that portion of the application or let it hinge on approval by traffic engineering of a different design. But there seemed like there were three or four risers, steps coming from the back door down to the pavement, so that has to be dealt with either right out the back door or off the deck. My wife will be here. If I could make one comment, kind of for bringing everybody's thoughts together maybe, I think if you approved it without the deck, if she were to bring it back with a deck that I would approve, that portion of the site plan would be considerably different. Now, I guess considerably different is somewhat an interpretive process, but I wouldn't approve just the deck stuck on the back of the building. and there would have to be a lot of safety barriers up and maybe, like I said, change the circulation in one way, things of that nature. So I think it could be construed that she could bring you back a different plan within a year's time that I think would be different enough for you to reconsider if you want to go ahead and not allow the debt currently but then maybe have her come back if she would be willing to invest some additional capital into to make this a safer circulation package. All right. Thank you, Mr. Gallimore. So, Ms. Turner, you have some choices here. We could go forward with what is before us, or you could continue the case to allow you an opportunity to work with Mr. Gallimore and the Traffic Department. Would we be going forward with what you're going to approve for indoor? Well, I can't tell you. I don't know what we're going to approve. Yes. But with what the recommendations for the indoor that you all have made. And you also have the opportunity to withdraw the outdoor portion. Okay. And that would mean we would take no action on it, and that would allow you to – that That way you would probably get the indoor portion approved and you wouldn't have a disapproval concerning the outdoor portion. Which the benefit to that would be I could bring that back to him at any time with more. That's right. And you would also go ahead and get your indoor portion approval. So it would allow you to throw some bar stools in there. Okay. Then I would withdraw the deck portion. I'm not telling you you have to do that. I know. I thought I understood that to be what would be the end. Yes. You'd have to go through the same process of sending out the notices and all that, but it would allow you to come up with a plan that might be acceptable to Mr. Gallimore. Okay. So it's your choice to withdraw the section concerning the outdoor portion. Yes. Is that what you'd like to do? Yes, it is. Okay. Okay. So any other discussion? If not, I'll ask for a motion on the amended request by Ms. Turner. Mr. Chairman, I move that item C-2009-39, Gail Turner, Get Twisted Ink, Appeals for a Conditional Use Permit, to establish a wine bar with live background music and planned shopping center B-6P zone on property located at 3344 Partner Place No. 6 be approved. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo. Set forth the following conditions, or with the following conditions is set forth by the staff. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo. Second that motion. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. All those in favor of Mr. Stumbo's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? All right. Motion passes. Good luck to you, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you very much. You're welcome. All right. So, if I'm reading my agenda correctly, I can't put you off any longer. I'm calling A2009-42 Mark Seaver. Would you like to come forward, please? That is. I was going to make you stand while I did that, but you don't have to. All right. Mr. Marks, would you like to go ahead? Not really. Okay. I guess I will. Is it four in the morning or four in the afternoon? I've lost track. This request is an administrative appeal to allow what's described as a shipping container to be used as an accessory storage structure on a residential property. This is a rendering they provided with the application that shows the shipping container that has some siding added to it and also the adjoining carport that's proposed. So it's not as built? I don't think so, unless it was really within the last day or two. Okay. Not built yet. Okay. Well, we'll get into that. Our main concerns with this, and hopefully Mr. Neum can add some when I'm done, but the main concerns are this type of structure really isn't contemplated the way the zoning ordinance is crafted right now as an allowable accessory structure. At least when it comes to the site, it's portable. There's all kinds of questions related to how you'd have to interpret the ordinance to make sure that it's, quote, a building or a, quote, structure. There may or may not be ways kind of around that. I think a more significant issue is related to the Kentucky Building Code. How is the structure going to be attached to the ground? Is there going to be footers, that kind of thing? How do you verify the structural components of a particular unit? You know, I think some of the stuff we looked up research-wise said that these kind of things, when they're used as shipping containers, maybe have a lifespan of maybe 20 years. I don't know if that's because they just get banged up or their structural integrity is lost over time. I don't know. But once you get down to having to permit something like this, those are the questions building inspection would have to ask. Or one way or another is, you know, what's the history of a particular unit? What's the structural integrity of a particular unit? And there may be all kinds of other building code issues that building inspection might want to fill you in with. A third concern is just, you know, maybe shipping containers meet the test of, you know, being structurally sound, maybe far much stronger than a typical, you know, site-built timber frame or wood frame structure. But what do you do when you get into a different type of a portable container that's maybe not a shipping container? Where do you draw the line? So those are all the kinds of things that building inspection is worried about. And Mr. Ewing, do you have anything else you wanted to add as far as building code or permitting issues with regard to this kind of a structure? Yeah, I think we need to start off by just defining our realizing that this doesn't meet even the definition of a building. And why do you say that? Glad you asked. Fell right into that one. According to the ordinance, it says any structure for which the shelter or enclosure for persons, animals, and property. But if you get into the building code, under structure, I believe it's under structure. It just gets into the physical aspects of it as far as strength and tests and so forth. But Mr. Marks brought up my main concern, I think, if you look at this as a commercial container, and that's all these boxes are. You get into your pods, you get into your shipping containers. What's to say that a transfer trailer is not a container that can be used for this? I'm sure you could probably get some structural engineer somewhere to devise a foundation system and a roof system and conduct tests that shows that it meets all the loads of a building. But where do you stop this? These are commercial containers. On their own, you set them there. they would be in violation. Well, we have a portable MRI on South and Drive behind the vet clinic. I think it's located within a semi-truck trailer. No, but that's for a business use. Okay. We went through a whole long process to get that as a business use. It's accessory to the veterinarian clinic. This is just an accessory building. Well, I thought your concern was safety. Is now the fact that it's residential? Well, that's one thing, but what we're looking at is the use for this thing and what's the intended use for the container. It's a commercial container. Yeah, you can – do you want to bring a mobile home in, knock the trailer out from under it and call it a storage shed? Do you want to broaden this thing into pods and dumpsters and the business end of a milk delivery truck and go, oh, well, we can get a structural engineer to say it meets the litmus test for all the loads imposed required by the building code. But is that what you really want to get into? You can't regulate design, and yeah, that's an attractive layout. But believe me, that's not the rule. This is the exception. Well, are we talking about aesthetics or are we talking about safety? I think we're talking about does it meet the test of being a building. I think it's a building. I think it's a container. I think it's a commercial container designed for the delivery of products. I don't think it was ever meant to be something you dragged in in a residential area for an accessory building. Mr. Hume, what if it was set on a slab and anchored to the concrete? Well, and that's just it. You can come in here and say, okay, it doesn't meet the design criteria for a building. And they'll say, fine, give me a letter from a structural engineer. He'll design a foundation and a footing system for it. He'll design an attachment system as far as bolts and all this. If you want to add a roof, he'll give me a design for all that, and we can dress it up and make the duct look like something else. But we're not going to get that all the time. I mean, this is an exception to come in and dress this container up to make it look like a nice accessory structure. The majority of the general population is not going to do that if you allow this to happen. They're going to buy a pod, drag it in their backyard, get some engineer to give them a letter to bolt it down on a slab, and leave it laying there until it rusts out. And I think you're opening the door for a lot of possibilities over one nicely presented shipping container that's dressed up to make it look like something else. Well, I would hate to tell you, but they're doing this out west all the time with these shipping containers. They are building homes. I'm sure they are. I'm sure they are. And we get back. Here you go. And we're just going to have to adapt, unfortunately. And, you know, I don't know what it's going to take for us to have to do that, but we will because of all the green that's going on and the reuse of these things. And we probably will have to define it so that they can't take a pod or one of these other. And I understand that, but you can see my dilemma on this. Oh, I can understand. You don't have the guidelines to go by. And this is going to turn into one of those deals that's not in my neighborhood kind of deals. And I'm not against these people in particular or their neighborhoods, but I'm just looking overall across the board. This is going to be the exception, not the rule. There can be some regulations that protect the public. There can be an occupancy permit required. This structural engineering letter that you say will just get thrown with each one that comes your way, that's a significant... Well, the technical aspects aren't my concern. My concern is turning a commercial product container made for shipping into a fast food type structure that a lot of people are going to come in and set on their property and go from there. I have a question for Ms. Boland. I mean, is there some way that we can approve this and put some conditions on here that, you know, these people get what they want, it's a good design, it's a good, you know, use of recycling, so that we can address Mr. Hume's concerns? Well, I mean, certainly you can determine. I think the issue is whether you can determine that this proposal constitutes an accessory structure. That's the issue. I think you could certainly, this is basically an administrative appeal. It's not the kind of thing you put conditions on. But, for instance, in your findings, it would be we find this is an accessory structure because. And you can, in essence, set forth the facts and conditions of this case that make it qualify as an accessory structure should you make that decision. And then someone else that comes in to building inspection, in essence, in order to take advantage of this case, they're going to have to present a scenario that matches all of the findings of fact made in this case. You know, I agree that Mr. Hume has some really serious concerns, and I know in the past there have been situations, of course I can't remember a specific one at this point, where this board has made a ruling, but also, for instance, asked its staff to notify the Planning Commission of its concerns that perhaps some text amendments may be necessary to address this as a new issue that is just simply not addressed in the zoning ordinance. You know, it may be something that for the future we do need to look at what other communities have done to regulate the use of these. But for now, you're operating in a vacuum. And, you know, you can make whichever decision you think is appropriate to find that this is or is not an accessory structure as opposed to a temporary shipping unit. Well, that was my thinking exactly, that this is the vineyard case all over again, where there weren't any ordinances to address whether or not we could have a vineyard, and it got allowed, and then there were ordinances. Even that, Mr. Brown, had some state law backing as far as vineyards and agricultural products and stuff like that. This is not, this doesn't even get close to that. This is, you're about to turn something, an orange into an apple all of a sudden. My next question is for Mr. Sievert. Do you have a copy of your application for a building permit? I have a lot of comments. Sure. Okay. First of all, I should say I'm a license card. Okay, would you come to the podium, please? I've been licensed since 1990, practicing in Lexington, but primarily throughout the state of Kentucky. I have never had an occasion which to be here before the board and had counted on someone, a member of my staff, to talk to Mr. Marks. And I think had I actually met with him myself, some of these things would have been straightened out. But is it appropriate for me to discuss some of these items that have been done at this time? Now, I would like to see the copy of your permission. Well, I was trying to get a building permit, but I couldn't get one because they said, no, this is not a – I mean, they couldn't even discuss it. Okay. The first item is in response to, you know, I have a comment. The appellant has not provided any compelling reasons as to why a shipping container should be considered a building or structure as those terms are defined and used in the zoning ordinance. So that was the statement. And we've had the definition sort of read quickly. But I'm going to read it slowly and clearly in the hope that it sinks in. And Article 111 defines a building as any structure for the shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, or property. So I'm emphasizing the word any. So if it constitutes a structure, then it should be constituted a building. What would you be using this structure for? It is primarily to get a sailboat out of my yard and to have a place to put it and lawnmower, some other items like that. Can I ask a quick question, given that? What was this product when you purchased it? What was it called? What was it being used for? It was called a shipping container. Thank you. But metal studs, metal studs, well, let me address that, is that I am using the shipping container not for what it was, but for what it will be. Its intention was that the manufacturer wasn't. Just as metal studs are intended to act as studs, but they are, in the end, a building material. I'm using this just as you would use metal studs. So I'm covering it. I'm sheathing it. It's no different than a building material. So it won't be a shipping container when I'm done. It'll be anchored to the ground permanently. It's not going anywhere. And let me finish the definitions here. The second one, let's see. Okay, so we've defined it as a building if it meets the definition of a structure. The second definition for a structure says anything constructed, the use of which requires permanent location on the ground or attached to something having permanent location on the ground. There's my carport. It will be, as we heard earlier today, that a carport is a permanent structure. So I think that clearly I've met the definition of building and structure, and that is with the LFUCG zoning ordinance. The Kentucky Building Code is even clearer, and I won't bore you with that. I can tell Mr. Griggs is pretty satisfied with that definition. And excuse my emotion. I get like this one. It's my personal project. The second item that was – Would you explain how you plan to permanently attach it to the ground? I've got foundation details that are right here. Absolutely. Come on up. Is that your Porsche there? Is that your Porsche? Yes. Okay. Good for you. That's why I need the container. I've not had a garage or a car flow for some time. So we've got, and I have this illustration here simply to kind of. So you're going to put some fascia on there? Right. This would be conventional construction here. And the only significant difference is, you know, while we're using the corrugation steel, provide a level of vertical support in lieu of traditional sets. So with regard to strength, they load these things up with 40,000 pounds of material, put them on ships, stack them up six high, and then send them across the ocean where they're subjected to ocean gales and waves, and certainly compete with any earthquake you'd find in California. You can put some hardy board or something. I'm hoping to use a high-grade wood, actually. And then your foundation detail there. That is a standard footing with steel tube columns that are welded to a plate at the top and another seal angle that would be welded directly to the channel at the base of the container itself, welding it to the ground so it can't pull out in a wind load situation. That would be, and the welding would be permanent. Permanent. I mean, it could be cut loose, but just as you could take a bulldozer and knock a house over. I have a structural engineer. I've already spoken to my structural engineer this morning who thought this whole thing was crazy, that there would be any questions. We do crazy here. Well, I do crazy here. I mean, here's the proof. But with regard to the strength. These used to be containers. And look at this project. How you can use containers as a structure. A1 container, or you can buy money if I can't do this. You can see all the projects. You can track me down. In the U.S., around the world. It's true. I've seen them. So it is a structure. It can't be used. Okay. It's a structure. In 2007, the state of Kentucky adopted the International Building Code, which I've got a copy of there. and with amendments. So the Kentucky Building Code is essentially the International Building Code now, of which these containers that you see, I'm sure many of them had to make it through the International Building Code. I can't say which ones particularly. I personally did a pretty thorough search of the code looking for anything that I could find that would suggest that in any way this is not something that could be done. I couldn't find anything, and then I challenged a number of people in the office to try to do the same thing. Just find one thing in here that says this is not something that can be done. couldn't be found so so the second item that somehow this is in violation of a Kentucky building code in my view if it is I can't find it and I haven't had anybody tell me what it is I thought you're going to show me something okay just a question of curiosity these this good this shipping containers how wide It is 8 feet wide. Required parking spaces via the ordinance are a minimum of 9 feet. Is that correct? You won't be parking a car inside. It's for the storage portion of this. It's a carport with storage. The boat fits. Okay. Let's see. I've kind of got off script here. I'll spare you. There's a section in the Kentucky Building Code related to motor vehicle occupancies and car ports. And, again, I read that thoroughly before I came over here. I can't find a problem. Let's see. And then, let's see, the recycled container is useful. Okay, I think in, you know, roughly, I've covered most of the strength issues related to the fact that these things are far more structurally sound than what you're going to find related to typical home construction. I mean, you don't stack homes six high and put them on ocean liners, and you don't trust a home on the back of a tractor-trailer going 80 miles an hour beside you. And the Department of Transportation has approved these for that partially based on their structure, stability and they don't you know make that provision for just for just anybody and then let's see Well, that's not wrong. So part of the purpose for this is to, and I'm glad Ms. Edwards brought it up, But there is concern among not just myself, but a lot of architects and people in general that we are, you know, we've got these shipping containers stacking up in ports. And we saw them stacked in Seattle and Portland, and they're empty. They're sitting there. We're importing things. We're not exporting things. And these things are ultimately being sent to scrapyards where more energy – so you've got energy and pollution resulting from moving them to these places where they're scrapped, where they're cut up, and the energy in that. Then they have to be melted down. They get turned back into raw steel and get shipped back to China, where they get turned into a shipping container again and sent back over. So this is a case where we take something that already exists, is structurally sound. The one thing that I did want to address had to do with this question of the fact that I'm calling it a shipping container, but it's really not. It's a building material. And then there's pods, and I understand your concern. They're not shipping containers. And so this concern, and I think Mr. Marks brought up as well, is that the difference between one and the other and how do you determine when you've got one and when you've got another. Shipping containers are very specific. They are licensed internationally. They have serial numbers. No two have the same serial number. And this one has one as well, although it's been painted over. but they are marked specifically for tracking, and once someone was remotely familiar, or just in 10 minutes you could probably learn to identify one from another. So I'm not suggesting in any way that a pod should be accepted as a means of structural support for wood siding or anything else of that nature. This is a case where this is something with proven structural integrity. They've been used for years. They're watertight. They've got a lot of advantages that other means of construction just don't have. So I will leave it at that, and if you've got questions, I can entertain them. Seabird. question. Okay. Sure. Thank you. All right. Now, in our findings, should we also include a referral to the Planning Commission, or would that be in the motion? No, I wouldn't put that in your findings or really even in the motion on this case. After you have made your decision on this case and it's closed, you can look – I mean, you don't even have to do a motion. You can do that on the board items. Yeah, you can informally just ask the staff to maybe pass along this staff report in your findings and ask the Planning Commission to consider whether they think a text amendment to help regulate this kind of a situation would be helpful. And then staff will certainly pass that along to the Planning Commission. I would suggest you insist they hire an architect. We need the work. Shameless self-promotion there, Mr. Seabrook. All right. Any other questions for the applicants or the staff or any discussion? No? If not, I'll entertain a motion then. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move that Item A, 2009-42, Mark Seaver, Appeals for an Administrative Review to allow a portable storage shipping container to be used as an accessory garage for a single-family residence in a planned neighborhood residential zone on a property located at 446 Silver Maple Way be approved. Ms. Bowen, do I need to include the findings with the two findings for approval as prepared by legal staff? Second. All right. Thank you, Mr. Stonewell and Ms. Edwards. Do those findings need to be read into the record or can we just attach them? Well, we usually read them into the record. I'll go ahead and read them then. The findings for approval, number one, the structure will be placed on a permanent location and will be incorporated as part of a carport, which is indisputably considered a structure. In addition, the structure will have a permanent foundation. Number two, the original shipping container in this case will function more as a building material to provide the internal structural support added to a permanent foundation and then covered with traditional exterior materials, thus creating a new accessory structure. All right. Thank you, Mr. Stumbo. All those in favor of Mr. Stumbo's motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Lucky Mr. Siever. All right. I believe that includes all our items on the agenda. Now, our next item is Roman number four, the board items. First of all, I'd like to recognize Mr. Barry Brock, even though he's not here. He's retiring, and today is his last day on the job, and I guess he's already gone to the tavern to celebrate. But he has served us faithfully for decades, I presume, and always been a big help. And we've always appreciated his brief but informative answers to our questions. Now, secondly, I'd like to request the staff inform, I guess, the Planning Commission or the City Council of our decision here in the Mark Seaver matter and ask them to consider whether a text amendment is in order. Any other board items? any other any staff items our next meeting date is August 28th and if no further business I'll declare the meeting adjourned alright have a good weekend everyone If you're out on a date and you bring it home late, it's a sin. You just ain't no excuse and you know you're gonna lose and never win. I'll say it again and it's all because your mama don't dance and your daddy don't. Rock and roll. Your mama don't dance and your daddy on the rock and roll. When evening rolls around and it's time to go to town, where do you go? Rock and roll. guitar solo You hop into the back seat where you know it's nice and dark But you're just about to move and you're thinking it's a breeze There's a light in your eye and then a guy says Out of the car, long hair! Louie, you're coming with me You're loving hoodies And it's all because Your mama don't dance and your daddy don't rock and roll Your mama don't dance and your daddy don't rock and roll The evening rolls around and it's time to go to town. Where do you go? To rock and roll. Where do you go? To rock and roll. Where do you go? To rock and roll. Hey! Uh-huh. Hey! Uh-huh. What I like about you, you hold me tight. Tell me I'm the only one, wanna come over tonight. Yeah. You keep whispering in my ear. Tell me all the things that I want to hear, cause it's true. That's what I like about you. What I like about you. You really know how to dance. When you go up now, jump around, think about true romance. Yeah. Fall whispering in my ear. Tell me all the things that I want to hear, cause it's true. That's what I like about you That's what I like about you That's what I like about you Woo! Woo! Hey! What I like about you You keep me warm at night Never wanna let you go No, you make me feel alright Yeah All whispering in my ear Tell me all the things that I want to hear Cause it's true That's what I like about you That's what I like about you That's what I like about you That's what I like about you That's what I like about you That's what I like about you That's what I like about you All I like is I just... Hey! Uh-huh. Hey! Hey! Hey! Hey! Uh-huh. Hey! guitar solo Only son Listen closely To what I say And if you do this It'll help you On some sunny day I know Oh, take your time Don't live too fast Troubles will come And they will pass We'll find a woman And you'll find love And don't forget son There is someone Up above And be a simple Kind of thing Or be something You love and understand Baby be a simple Candleman Won't you do this for me son If you can Get your lust For the rich man's gold All that you need Is in your soul And you can do this If you try All that I want for you, my son Is to be satisfied And be a simple Kind of thing Or be something You love and understand Baby, be a simple Kind of thing Won't you do this Only something If you can guitar solo We'll be right back. I'm John Cobb. I own Rainscape, which is a low-impact sustainable design landscape design build firm. And I'm a landscape architect. I've been licensed for a long time. This rain garden is right at about a year old. and it's a garden that's designed to take this one from a water from a part of my roof and it processes that water to take it out of, eliminate it from being runoff and let it infiltrate into the soil. So I dug a depression that came even to ground level at one end and then it was a ground slope to the other side. I created a little dam, and so that creates an impoundment area that infiltrates the water from the roof. And then I selected plants that are appropriate to wetter areas, drier areas, but it can stand being flooded for a while and also can stand periods of drought. So these are very resilient plants, and they're mostly native ones, the ones that know how to grow well here. The runoff from this location of my yard primarily went onto my neighbor and would go down his driveway, but then would ultimately drain from there across my property and back into the stream behind the property. So I've taken a fourth of my roof water, and it no longer follows that path. It infiltrates directly into the ground. So the more water that I can take from my roof, from the downspouts, or from the pavement, the more I can infiltrate and the less I have going directly to a stream or into the city sewer to be processed there. So the impact can be tremendous the more of that runoff you're able to capture. This was my first project, and so I was getting used to it. There are mechanical devices you can use that make it a lot quicker to remove sod and to break up the soil so that you can work with it more easily. And I was doing it all manually the first time. So it makes it a lot better if you can rent some equipment, which is reasonably done. The only upkeep I have done, a couple of times a year I'll go in with a pitchfork and fluff up the mulch. I'll cover it with a couple of three inches of mulch. And that makes it look better, but functionally it holds the moisture in so that in drought periods the garden remains healthy. So a couple of times a year I'll go in and fluff that up to make it look better. This spring I added some more mulch to it because over time it will break down and become organic material going in and creating topsoil. So that's really all the, you know, whenever I come out to enjoy the garden, if there's any weeds poking up, I'll pull them. But that's the only maintenance that I've had to do. As to the cost of the garden, I spent, you know, it's about a hundred square foot garden. And in total to rent equipment and buy the plants, maybe I've got $500 in that. And that's probably a reasonable do-it-yourself cost budget. If you hire someone to do it for you, if you don't have time or you're not of an ability level to do it, the cost is going to go up. But that's about what this cost me. And the maintenance, again, is virtually nonexistent once you get it put in. The benefits of a rain garden are that it processes water falling on developed property and restores it to the profile that you would find in undeveloped property. So it reduces flooding and erosion. It infiltrates pollutants from cars and lawn chemicals and animal waste. It filters it through the water before it gets into the groundwater, which is the source of our drinking water. So the more that we can reduce that, reduce flooding in streams, it really effectively reduces the cost of drinking water because the water company has less cost of processing that. So effects and benefits across the board. My name is Kara Binge, and I am the Bluegrass Rain Garden Alliance Coordinator. The purpose of the Rain Garden Alliance is to facilitate and help people understand what rain gardens are and help them build it. The goal is 2010 rain gardens by 2010. We can come out and look at their site or I can find more of an expert to come out like John or an engineer or a commercial professional person to come and look at their site and give them advice. We have excellent resources on the web at BluegrassRainGardenAlliance.org. And then also at Bluegrass Pride we have the Bluegrass Rain Garden manuals. So if they wanted to come into Bluegrass Pride, which is on Pimlico Parkway in Manowar, in the Park Hill Shopping Center, they could pick one of these up and it gives a step-by-step process of how to build a rain garden. You can basically do it anywhere. You can do it in a sunny spot like John has done here. You can do it with shade loving plants. And not only is it helping out the environment and dealing with storm water issues, it's also creating a great habitat for native insects and birds. So it's really fun to look at as well. There's two at the Arboretum, which are really easy for anybody to go and look at. There's one in the back of the property and it says rain garden. It's pretty obvious with the signage there. And then there's one closer to the building. We have so far had two rain garden tours, so being up to date with what's on the website, that's posted on the website and it's listed in the Herald. It's happened every spring, so that's a good way to go and see what other people have done. They could call Bluegrass Pride and talk to me. And then also the bluegrassraingardenalliance.org, those are the two best ones. We have a lot of links of other states and other rain gardens and what people are doing around the country with rain gardens. The urban county government is always looking for ways to make the waste management experience a little easier for Lexington citizens, especially at large events that are held around town. Richard Boone, Recycling Coordinator for the Division of Waste Management explains. What we're going to be talking about today is our new special event containers. On the right here you see the new container. on the left you see the roses that we have all over the town and residents. This is what we normally use for special events, but we found that it takes a lot of manpower, a lot of labor, a lot of time to take these out and set them up and then go back and get them when we're finished. So what we found is this little more mobile unit here. It's a little wire frame unit that just collapses real easily. You can take just a light duty pickup truck and take it to the site. And it's also a dual stream unit. There's something else we liked about it. Before, we'd had to have one Herbie and one Rosie to do both the garbage and recyclables, so that's two containers you had to take. This unit is two in one. You have your garbage on one side and your mixed recyclables on the other. So that's another good thing about it. And also, the clear bag is a new concept that is being used to kind of give you a visual of what goes in the container. You notice the black bag on this side is for the garbage, and your clear bag on this side, which you can see through, will show you what's inside there for the recyclables. So when people start coming to use it, they see the water bottles, the cans on that side. It kind of helps give them a visual aid that this is for recyclables, this is for your garbage. And these will be used in special events throughout the city, so you'll start to to see them pretty soon. We're going to get a trailer that's going to house the units, and so it'll be very mobile. If you have a special event, you just come hook to the trailer, and everything will be in there, the bags, the containers, the lids. You take it to the site, set it up, collect your recyclables and your garbage, and at the end of the event, you take it out. Richard explains how the Division of Waste Management developed the Dual Stream Waste Collection Program. We've been struggling with special events for some time on how do we get out of having to load up 50 or 100 of these Herbies and Rosies and take them out. It just takes so much manpower and so much time and effort to get them out there and then to service them. So we got to looking around, and we found a similar unit to this that was just recyclables only, and we have some of those. You may have seen those at some events we've had in the past, and we still use them from time to time. But then we stumbled across, looking around the Internet, and some information that comes through the mail, we saw these containers, ordered a sample, tried it out, and we actually had them at the 4th of July festival here this past couple weeks ago. And they worked real well. And people seem to, you know, you have both materials in one spot, in one container, it just seems to work very well that way. People don't have to walk to two or three different spots to get rid of their items. Richard talks about some of the new initiatives the division is implementing in the coming weeks and months. Well, we have the new recycling containers that's going to be coming downtown. They're permanent containers, what we call pitch-ins. If you go downtown now, you just notice you just have a metal container there for your garbage. And that's all you have. You don't have anything for recycles. Now, this is going to be a more mobile unit for, like, special events. Like I said, it's not going to be something permanent. But what we have coming downtown in about two months are going to be new pitch-in containers that will take place to the ones you see now. So we'll actually be replacing those containers. It's a dual stream unit, sort of like this, that have garbage on one side and recycling on the other. So that's something new we've got coming very soon. As green issues come to the forefront, there have been encouraging signs in the usage of Lexington's recycling options, and Richard explains what is being done to keep up with the demand. It's just skyrocketing all the time. As people may be aware, we're looking at a new facility, building a new facility in the next year, year and a half, two years. And it's just strictly because of volume. We've got more volume than what the current facility has capacity to handle. So the recycling ratios keep going up all the time. And the new facility allows us to give more recycling options for, like, multifamily housing places, apartments and stuff like that where we can put recycling dumpsters throughout the city, which will help also capture some of the materials. But it's increasing all the time. Richard has one final message to give to folks about using our recycling options. Well, I just want to let people know that it's very easy to recycle. It's easy. It's free. It does take no effort. I mean, basically, all you're doing is just putting one thing in one side and one thing on the other. So if you don't have recycling at your home or your business or your school, your apartment or wherever you're at, just call 3-1-1. They'll set you right up. It'll take your request, take your information and get your container out there. And it costs nothing. It's free. It's easy. Don't forget the e-waste collection we do. We do it six days a week now at the Roussel Road location. So if you have your e-waste, you know, make sure to take that stuff there. In the world of art, form doesn't always follow function. And often, function leaves a bit to be desired in the aesthetics department. A new private and public partnership program in Lexington, however, seeks to find a harmonious balance between the two in the form of bus shelters. Yvette Hurt, coordinator for Art in Motion, enlightens us. The inspiration for this project really happened in 2004 when the tax referendum that provided stable local funding for Lex Tran was passed for the first time. Lex Tran in its history had never had stable local funding. And in 2004, when the tax referendum passed, they were finally able to begin to build the system and do long-range planning. I and many others supported that tax referendum and that local funding. And like many people, I looked around Lexington and I saw bus riders waiting out in all kinds of weather without shelter, many times without a seat. And I thought it wouldn't be great if we could get more bus shelters in Lexington. And I'm a longtime art lover, particularly public art that's accessible to everyone. And so I, you know, I thought. Thank you.