Board of Adjustment

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Board of Adjustment convened on January 8, 2018, at 1:00 PM in the Council Chambers at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Branden Gross presiding as the meeting officer. The board addressed three agenda items during the session, including the approval of previous meeting minutes and two development-related requests from local applicants. The meeting included substantial public participation, with 10 public comments heard throughout the proceedings and 4 formal votes taken by the board members. Of the two development requests considered, the board approved a variance request submitted by Jeff Baker while denying a combined conditional use permit and variance request from Dustin Wunderlich.

Attendance

The following members were present at the meeting on January 8, 2018:

• Branden Gross
• Harry Clarke
• Chad Needham
• Joan Whitman
• Jan Meyer
• Raquel Carter
• Thomas Glover

All members were in attendance with no absences or late arrivals recorded.

Votes and Decisions

The board conducted four votes during the January 8, 2018 meeting, with mixed outcomes on the agenda items.

Minutes Approval 0:00 Harry Clarke motioned to approve the minutes from the December 15, 2017 meeting, seconded by Joan Whitman. The motion passed unanimously with all seven members voting in favor: Branden Gross, Harry Clarke, Chad Needham, Joan Whitman, Jan Meyer, Raquel Carter, and Thomas Glover.

PLN-BOA-17-00092 - Baker Variance 1:00 Chad Needham motioned to approve Jeff Baker's variance request to increase allowable projection to within 1 foot of the side lot line, seconded by Harry Clarke. The motion passed unanimously 7-0, with all board members voting in favor. The approval was subject to three conditions outlined by staff.

PLN-BOA-17-00091 - Wunderlich Application (First Vote) 3:25 Harry Clarke motioned on Dustin Wunderlich's conditional use permit request for a commercial greenhouse and variance to eliminate landscape easement, seconded by Chad Needham. The motion failed in a 3-3 tie vote. Voting in favor were Harry Clarke, Chad Needham, and Jan Meyer. Voting against were Raquel Carter, Joan Whitman, and Thomas Glover.

PLN-BOA-17-00091 - Wunderlich Application (Second Vote) 3:25 Following the failed first motion, Raquel Carter made an alternative motion for approval of the conditional use permit and partial variance for Dustin Wunderlich, seconded by Joan Whitman. This motion also failed in a 3-3 tie vote. Voting in favor were Raquel Carter, Joan Whitman, and Thomas Glover. Voting against were Harry Clarke, Chad Needham, and Jan Meyer. This approval would have been subject to nine conditions outlined by staff.

The tie votes on the Wunderlich application effectively denied both the original request and the alternative approval motion.

Public Comment

Ten community members spoke during the public comment period, all expressing opposition to Dustin Wunderlich's greenhouse application.

Mary Dianne Hanna, representing neighborhood associations, opened the public comment period by opposing the greenhouse project 2:00. She cited incompatibility with the surrounding area and highlighted the applicant's previous non-compliance issues.

Alex Martin raised environmental concerns about water runoff and questioned whether the proposed use qualified for agricultural classification 2:10. Lauren Gambrell spoke on behalf of her in-laws, expressing concerns about the greenhouse's negative impact on property values 2:20.

Dr. Lisa Gannoe focused on the property's history of non-compliance and pointed to inaccuracies in the submitted site plans 2:30. Wayne Mitchell raised infrastructure concerns, specifically addressing water usage issues, the lack of a septic system, and potential environmental impacts 2:40.

Walt Gaffield questioned the legality of the applicant's current business operations and compliance with local regulations 2:50. Former board member Jim Griggs emphasized the need for an accurate site plan stamped by a licensed surveyor 3:00.

Dr. Charles Martin recounted historical objections to the property and noted that the previous owner had failed to meet required conditions 3:10. Gloria Martin stressed the importance of accurate notifications and compliance with zoning regulations 3:15.

Amy Clark concluded the public comment period by arguing that the structure is not legally non-conforming and questioned the board's authority to grant variances for the project 3:20.

The comments collectively addressed concerns about environmental impact, infrastructure adequacy, compliance history, property values, and legal conformity of the proposed greenhouse operation.

Contested Items

The meeting featured one contested item that resulted in a deadlocked decision by the board.

Conditional Use Permit for Dustin Wunderlich

The board considered a conditional use permit and variance request submitted by Dustin Wunderlich. The application generated significant disagreement among board members, ultimately resulting in a 3-3 split vote. Due to the tie, the conditional use permit and variance request failed to receive approval.

The deadlock prevented any action on Wunderlich's application, leaving the matter unresolved. The specific nature of the proposed use and the reasons for the variance request that led to the board's division were not detailed in the available meeting materials.

This split decision demonstrates the challenging nature of land use decisions where board members may have differing interpretations of zoning requirements, community impact, or compliance with local regulations.

Approval of Minutes

0:00

The board reviewed and discussed the minutes from their December 15, 2017 meeting. Branden Gross served as the key speaker during this agenda item.

The board proceeded to approve the minutes from the previous meeting without any recorded objections or amendments. The approval was completed as part of the standard meeting procedures.

Outcome: The minutes from the December 15, 2017 meeting were approved.

Variance Request by Jeff Baker

1:00

The Board of Appeals considered case PLN-BOA-17-00092, a variance request submitted by Jeff Baker to construct a covered porch closer to the side lot line than typically permitted under current zoning regulations.

Jonathan Donley served as the key speaker presenting details of the variance request to the board. The proposal involved constructing a covered porch structure that would encroach into the required side yard setback area.

Following discussion of the request, the board voted to approve Baker's variance application. However, the approval came with specific conditions that must be met during construction and implementation of the project.

The variance approval allows Baker to proceed with construction of the covered porch at the reduced setback distance from the side property line, subject to compliance with the conditions established by the board during their deliberation.

Conditional Use Permit and Variance Request by Dustin Wunderlich

3:25

The board considered application PLN-BOA-17-00091, a request by Dustin Wunderlich for a conditional use permit to operate a commercial greenhouse and a variance to eliminate the required landscape easement on his property.

Wunderlich presented his proposal to the board, seeking approval for the commercial greenhouse operation. The application also included a variance request that would eliminate the landscape easement requirement for the property.

The board deliberated on both components of Wunderlich's request - the conditional use permit for the greenhouse business and the variance to waive the landscape easement. However, the board members were unable to reach a consensus on whether to approve the application.

The discussion resulted in a deadlock among board members, with no clear majority supporting approval of either the conditional use permit or the variance request. Due to this deadlock, the application was effectively denied, as it failed to receive the necessary votes for approval.

The outcome means Wunderlich will not be able to proceed with his commercial greenhouse operation as proposed, nor will he receive the variance to eliminate the landscape easement requirement on his property.