Planning Committee - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. This is the regular meeting of the Louisville Metro Board of Zoning Adjustment to hear cases as advertised and docketed for hearing today. Public notice has been provided and materials have been available for review by the public. The following rules are in place for today's meeting. Please silence all cell phones. Please be courteous and respectful to the Board and your fellow citizens. For those participating virtually, chat messages are not part of the record and not monitored by all members. Please refrain from sending messages to the panel. If you have any questions or would like to speak on a case, you may send messages to the host. Today's proceedings are being recorded.

Anyone wishing to address the board must do so from the podium or virtually. There are time limits in effect for today's meeting. The applicant or their representative shall have no more than fifteen minutes for their presentation. Other persons in favor of the application shall have a total of no more than three minutes per person. The opposition representative shall have a total of no more than fifteen minutes for their presentation.

Other persons opposed to the application shall have a total of no more than three minutes per person. Rebuttal by the applicant or their representative shall be no more than five minutes. If you plan on speaking, please fill out a speaker's form as soon as possible. Those participating virtually must notify the host if they would like to speak. Priorities shall be given to speaker cards in the order that they are received. Only those who have completed the speaker's form will be allowed to speak. Procedures shall be as follows. Staff will present a summary of the request. The applicant or representative will make a statement or presentation giving reasons for the request. Other persons in favor of the proposal will be heard.

The opposition representative will be heard. Those opposed to the proposal will then be heard. The applicant or their representative will then have an opportunity for rebuttal of the opposition's testimony. No new testimony shall be given during rebuttal. If there are further questions by the opposition after rebuttal, please fill out a form provided. The board may ask questions of the applicant, representative, or opposition at any time. Pursuant to KRS Chapter 61 and the Board Bylaws, the Board's deliberations and voting today will be held immediately following the public hearing for each case. No party will be allowed to speak during the deliberations of this board.

Roll call, please. Jan Horton?

Present. Ford?

Present.

Lewis? Present. Vozos? Present.

Rodriguez, not present. Bond?

Present. We have a quorum. Alright. Staff, would you stand so that I can swear you in? Do you swear that testimony you're about to give today is the truth? Yes. Thank you. Alright. First item on the agenda is approval of the minutes from the 04/20/2026 Board of Zoning Adjustment meeting. Members, have you had an opportunity to review the minutes? Any corrections or revisions? Is there a motion regarding the minutes? Madam chair? Yes.

Ford, I'd like to make a motion that we approve the minutes from the May or sorry, April 20 OSA meeting.

Thank you. Is there a second? Second, Horton.

Thank you. It's been properly moved and seconded to approve the minutes from the April 20 Board of Zoning Adjustment meeting. Roll call, please. Horton?

Yes.

Bozos?

Yes.

Ford?

Yes.

Lewis? Yes. Bond? Yes. The minutes have been approved.

We're now moving into the public hearing portion of the agenda. The first case is 26 appeal 0002, and the case is being continued.

Hi, Amy. Office of planning staff. We would like for this case to be continued to May 18 due to an error with the legal notice.

So the applicant is comfortable with that date?

Yes. They are aware, and they've agreed to May 18. Okay. Alright.

Is there a motion regarding the continuance?

Yes. Board member Vozos, I move that we postpone the case number 26Variant000 oh, it's not there. My bad. Second Yes. With regards to case number 26Appeal0002, I move that we postpone that till 05/18/2026.

You. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to continue twenty six appeal zero zero zero two to a date certain, being May 18. Roll call, please. Horton? Yes. Lewis? Yes. Bozos? Yes. Ford? Yes. Odd? Yes. The case will be continued.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next item on the agenda, 26 variance 42.

So this case is also requesting a continuance to May 18. There was some question about where the property line was located, and, staff requested more time for the applicant to produce a survey.

So the applicant's in agreement with May 18? Yes. Alright. Thank you. Members, is there a motion regarding continuing case number three on the agenda?

Madam chair, member Ford, I'd like to make a request for a motion to delay the variance zero zero four two till the May 18 meeting based on staff's request.

Alright. Is there a second?

Second. Horton.

Thank you. It's been properly moved and seconded to continue 26 variance zero zero four two to a date certain being May 18. Roll call, please. So done. Yes. Ford?

Yes.

Lewis? Yes. Bozos? Yes. Bond? Yes. The case will be continued. Item four on the agenda, 26 variance four.

Hello. Dirk Watson, office planning staff, 444 South 5th Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40202. This is a case that was continued from the 04/20/2026 BOSA meeting. It was continued to allow the applicant opportunity to provide testimony. This is for a fence variance at 227 East Ormsby Avenue. So the variance is from land development code section four point four point three to allow a 64 inch fence to exceed the maximum permitted height of 42 inches in the required front yard setback. So the variance is 22 inches. This property is zoned TNZD, and it's in traditional neighborhood form district. The applicant is proposing a 64 inch metal fence parallel to the sidewalk along East Hornsby Avenue. Here is the zoning map of the parcel.

Here is the aerial view of the parcel. And as a recap, this is the subject site. It is for the existing fence that's there. So the fence itself is 54 inches tall, but it is located on top of the one foot concrete retaining wall. And per the land development code regarding fence height, if it is within five feet of that public sidewalk, that additional height is included in the fence height.

That's why the variance is four sixty four inches. And this is the view across the street of the adjacent property. And then this is the site plan, and that's why you can see the 52 inch fence there on the side because that's how big the iron fence is, and then you have the 12 foot inch retaining wall. Staff finds the variance has been justified for approval based on the staff's analysis in the standard for review. The variance would not alter the essential character of the general vicinity and will not allow an unreasonable circumvention of the zoning regulations.

The proposed variance will not adversely impact adjoining property owners or residents in the general vicinity. The variance will not impede vision clearance. The required action today is to approve or deny the variance from land development code 4.4.3 to allow the fence to exceed the maximum permitted height of 42 inches in the front acquired front yard setback. And that is all. Stephanie, questions?

Could you talk to us a little bit about the certificate of appropriateness and the condition on that, please?

Yeah. Absolutely. So they originally came in, and they were in front of the old Louisville Architectural Review Committee to receive a certificate of appropriateness for a fence in the front yard. And they were approved for a fence in the front yard, but the fence was to be within our 42 inches. The approved SUA was not for the current fence. So the architecture review committee told them that they were need a variance to be approved, and then they could come back to get the current fence approved by the review committee. So we're currently looking at May 20 if this gets approved today for the ARC.

So you they need an approval here, and then they need a certificate of appropriateness?

Yes. Exactly. Architectural review committee.

Mhmm.

Exactly. And without both, they can't have the fence they currently have. Is that right?

Correct.

And they and the existing condition, the fence on the sides is only 52 inches. But is is the fence itself the same all the way around? It's just in the front. It's on that

Yeah. Exactly. 12 inch. Yeah. The the metal fence is the same height all around the front of the property. It's just when it's close to that front part of the sidewalk, there is that retaining wall there. Makes it a little bit taller.

But where it meets the corners, it's still from the top, it's still the same

Yeah. Exactly. Level. Right? Okay.

Mhmm. It's a little hard to see in that photograph.

So, typically, the certificate of appropriateness would be received prior to construction or prior installation? Prior installation. Correct. Mhmm. Hey. Members, any other questions for Drake?

Yes, please. Is is all of the fence mounted in the concrete footer?

It is located just behind that concrete retaining wall. It's located in the dirt.

Thank you. So does it have to do with the sidewalk that it has to be shorter? The sidewalk in front of the house, is that

So the maximum height of that 42 inches is for oh, sorry. It's for the entire front yard there, but the additional height where we're getting that 64 because the entire fence itself is 52 inches. But when it's so the development code says that if it's adjacent to a sidewalk within five feet of it, any additional height, whether it be, like, a berm or a retaining wall, that gets factored into the actual height of the fence itself too. So that's why we have, like it's located adjacent to that 12 foot tall retaining wall, so it's a total height of 64 inches.

So if there's no variance, the black fence would have to be reduced just in the front?

The whole thing.

Oh, the whole thing. Another question. The the front fence, is that the same style or quality as the other two side fences?

Yeah. So the fence itself is the same material going around the entire front of their property.

So they all look alike?

Yeah. It's all of the I I think it's an aluminum fence.

Thank you. So oftentimes when we have a fence case, we're presented with rationale for the height. Children playing in the yard or animals to keep animals. And do we know what the reason? Maybe this is a question for the applicant.

I would let the applicant respond. Yeah.

Okay. Members, any other questions? Thank you. Thank you.

And the applicant is supposed to be online, just to let you know. Okay. Thank you.

Right here.

Okay. Miss Lane, are are you speaking as the applicant?

I can. My husband's also on, but I can't see him through the Webex platform. So he might chime in here in a second.

Okay. Alright. Name and address, please, including ZIP code. Miss Lane.

Okay. I'll go. Laura Lane. 227 East Stormsby, Louisville, Kentucky, and I do not know the ZIP code offhand. I apologize.

You know it.

Okay. So I've I have 9305 Silver Silver Creek Court. Is that your address?

That's our current address. So we're both military, and we're stationed in the district military or the DMV. Excuse me.

Alright. Miss Lane, are you able to turn your camera on?

No. I just pressed it, and it's not coming on.

Hello. I'm Charles Lovejoy. I'm the property owner. I think my wife is speaking right now. Can you hear me?

I I can. I I would if you're gonna speak, I'll need to swear you in, mister Lovejoy.

Okay. Yeah. I'm happy to do that. I'm having technical issues over here with the with the microphone is all.

Okay. Alright. So you're not able to turn your camera on either.

Is that correct? Should be able to. Let me see what I can do. I apologize. I'm just not used to this format.

No. I don't I don't think I can, although I'm trying.

Okay. And and if both of you are going to to, speak to this case, I can swear you both in now.

Okay.

If raise your right hand, you swear that the testimony you're about to

give today is the truth?

I do.

Yes. He

never gave his name.

Okay. And your name, sir?

My name is Charles Lovejoy. In spite of the camera being off, I am probably as handsome as you think I am.

And your address?

It is 9305 Silver Creek Court, Fairfax, Virginia, ZIP code 22060. But the property in question today is 227 East Ormsby Avenue in Old Louisville, Kentucky, 40203 for the ZIP, if I remember right.

And your ZIP code is what? Because I have a different ZIP code.

The the Orbsby property is 402 That's your

ZIP code. That's Silver Creek Court.

Yeah. That should be 22060.

Actually, 22039.

I'm sorry. Yes. I'm getting Fort Belvoir confused with, with my current address. I'm sorry.

I'm confused now.

Okay. Alright. So who's going to speak first?

I'll speak first as the owner, and then my wife will will back me up, I believe.

Okay. Alright. Please proceed.

Okay. So, as you know, Charles Lovejoy, the owner, appreciate you hearing me out this afternoon. Again, I'm sorry I'm not here, in person. Just as my wife stated, we're here at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, and we're both in the army. That is a nine hour drive over to Louisville, and and and quite the commute.

So so, originally, we had, installed the fence on the well, we had a front fence installed on the property, mostly to deter crime, trespassing, not for nothing. There is, at, 1251 Brook Street, immediately behind, the Ormsby property is a halfway house. There are significant number of people moving up and down the alleyway immediately next to my house. Many of them going to and from that halfway house. There's a fairly well documented crime, more to the point, a drug problem there at that halfway house.

I've plenty of anecdotal evidence. The LMPD, you know, crime map will back all that up. I've seen needles tossed around next to my house. So that that fence that we've got installed there is for, for safety and to to encourage people to to move along. The the height of the fence, I guess, because that's the real question here.

I was unaware of the height restriction when it was initially put into place. If I could rewind time, I would either adhere to the restriction or request a variance, ahead of time to to prevent all of this. Be that as it may, I'd like to request that the board at least consider leaving the the fence in place as it stands. It has been, good for all of the the reasons I've requested or pointed out here deterring people from coming up and and loitering in the front of my property. Not for nothing.

Having to remove the fence, to adhere to that that height regulation, would be fairly onerous on our end. We can't simply, decrement the height of the of the fence. It has to be removed, and then we would have to get a new fence reinstalled. And that's would be costly both in terms of time and money. And in the meantime, that that fence is there for a fairly good reason.

So for the safety of of the property, for all the reasons that I think, I wanna say it was Drake, was having issues, all the reasons that, that were pointed out earlier, and good faith on my part, we'd like to request that the board allow us to just keep defense in place. That's all I have to say unless my wife wanted wants to jump in, to add anything over.

Thank you, miss Lane.

I'm

sorry. I didn't I didn't hear what you said.

I have nothing to add. Thank you. Okay.

Alright. Thank you. Members, any questions for mister Lovejoy or miss Lane?

Not sure if you mentioned this, but, how often are you all staying there, and what's the use of the house? Is it a rental or just second home? Or

Sure. Great question. Originally,

when

I bought the house back in 2020, that was my full time residence. I was stationed at Fort Knox. I was there for three years, living full time in the house, after we were well, the army requires us to move every couple of years. But we moved in 2023, and then we rented out the house, as often as we could. There's at least a thirty day minimum, to rent out that property, to avoid, you know, running afoul of the of the, I guess, the temporary rental property requirements around Old Louisville. So we've and between 2023 to now, we've been mostly just trying to rent the house out, for thirty days or more over.

Other questions? Alright. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

And miss Lane. Alright. I don't have any other speaker cards for for this case, so I'll close the public hearing. We'll move into deliberations. I'm sorry. One moment.

Can I ask staff a question?

Sure.

Just wanna make sure I understand how this architectural review committee works. That that's an overlay past our decision, so he has to have a positive decision from both?

Correct. So, really, what you're considering here is the height, not the design. You know, if you approve the height, it could be if you approve this variance for height, it could be any 64 inch fence that meets the design requirements of both the land development code and then additionally, also the Old Louisville historic preservation guidelines. So, really, all BOSA is considering is the height of the fence. The design of the fence is governed by either meeting the standards of the land development code, which are pretty minimal.

Or in this case, since there's an extra layer of design guidelines through the Old Louisville Local Preservation District, the design will have to meet an approval from the Old Louisville Architectural Review Committee.

Okay. So right now, the fence is is iron or aluminum or whatever it is, but it is not a privacy fence. It is a deterrent fence. If if we approve the 64 inch height variance, it's up to the architectural review committee if he wants to change that to a 64 inch privacy fence versus what it is now. Correct.

That is okay. And the other thing I have is it says our requirement's 42 inches. He's requesting 64, so variance of 22. But then it says the architectural review committee back in October '23 said the fence can exceed three feet in height. Have they got a different standard than the land development code?

Yes. They do. In the Old Louisville architectural review sorry. In the Old Louisville local preservation district guidelines, they have a different set of rules within those guidelines. But just like we're here at BOSA to make determinations about varying from the land development code, That's why they have to take things to their committee. Otherwise, it could be approved by staff. If it meets the local preservation district guidelines, staff can approve it. If it doesn't meet those guidelines, it has to go be reviewed by the committee.

Okay. So so they'll have to do another height approval as well as Design. Design approval. Correct. Thank you. Got it.

Okay. Other questions?

I have one final point as the owner of the house, I if I could.

Sir, we're we're we're in deliberations now.

I apologize, but there's a factual error that you should be aware of. And my height,

the fence is incorrect. We can't take testimony unless we reopen.

The height of the fence is incorrect.

Alright. So any any other discussion?

I think I know the answer to this question. I wanna ask staff this too. We're we're only concerned with the front yard setback fence, not the sides. Correct? Even though it's the same height all the way around?

It's it's so it's all technically in the front yard. Because it's with it's all within the front yard setback, which is what the fence regulations are. Right? It's fences can only be so tall if they're within the setback. Yeah. And so the entire front yard setback is the whole front yard.

That's three sides.

Okay. So all three sides of the fence that you saw in the image would be considered front yard setback fence.

Okay. And the architectural review committee, their oversight is the same thing.

Oversight, generally, is thing is items, fences, and the building that can be seen from the public street. So

So they define a little different. Yeah. We're talking.

But the same thing.

Yeah.

Okay. Thank you.

Anything else?

Yeah. I think I I got it. Okay.

Alright. If there's no other discussion, is anyone prepared to make a motion regarding the variance?

Madam chair, I can make a motion. Thanks so much. This is, member Vozos with regard to 26 case number 26Variant0004 location 227 East Orangeview Avenue. Move that we approve the variants as written in the staff report, location front yard setback, requirements 42 inches, request of 64 inches, thus creating a variance of 22 inches. Base that on the staff report and testimony heard today.

Is there a second?

Second Ford.

Thank you. It's been properly moved and seconded to approve the variance as stated. Roll call, please. Horton?

Yes.

Lewis? Yes. Bozos? Yes. Ford?

Yes. Vaughn?

Yes. The variance has been approved. Next item on the agenda is 26CUP0029. Mark.

Mark Pinto, office of planning staff. 444 South 5th Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40202. The applicant informed us this morning that they, would look they would like to request to continue this case since they were not able to make today's hearing. And we staff has thought it over and determined that the case should be continued continued to June 1. Since May 18 has a number of cases on it already, June 1 would be the most appropriate date to continue to.

And the applicant has agreed to to that?

Not yet. The May 18 was the date that was quickly discussed with the applicant prior to further discussion, but June 1 should work if May 18 was sufficient because they asked essentially for the next available date. And at the time, it was understood that was May 18, but now that it's changed to June 1. So

So you will work with them on the rescheduling?

Yes.

Okay. And there's no one else to speak to this case. It's my understanding. Alright. Okay. Members, we need a motion regarding continuing 26 CUP0029.

Madam chair, this is Member Bozzo, so I can make the motion.

Sure.

So we're making a motion regarding continuing. Is this to a date uncertain at this point?

I'd say to a date certain, yeah, to June 1. Okay.

Alright.

If they can't make June 1, then we can continue again at that meeting. That would be easier for all parties.

Okay. Alright. Thank you. Sorry, member member Vozos.

Yeah. No problem. This is member Vozos with regard to case number 26CUP0029, Location 6014 Robin Hood Lane. I move that we continue this to date certain 06/01/2026.

Thank you. Is there a

second? Second.

It's been thank you, mister Horton. It's been properly moved and seconded to continue case 26CUP0029 to a date certain, being June 1.

Roll call, please. Burton?

Yes. Bozos? Yes. Ford?

Yes.

Lewis? Yes. Bond? Yes. The case will be continued. Thank you. 26Variant0041, number six on the agenda.

Zach Schwalger, office of planning. 444 South 5th Street, Suite 3040202. This is a variance request for a street side yard setback for an accessory structure and also a private yard area variance. We'll go through kind of some detail on that here in a second, but it's in the r five residential single family zoning district and traditional neighborhood form district. It's approximately two tenths of an acre, and it's on the, eastern corner of Claremont Avenue and Arterburn Avenue near the railroad tracks on, Frankfurt.

The applicant's proposing to construct a carport that would encroach into the street side yard setback in private yard area. This is the site plan. So to the bottom of that, and we'll see a image of it here in a second, but to the bottom of Arterburn Avenue is the, railroad tracks along Frankfurt Avenue. So the Arterburn Avenue essentially acts as kind of an alley for a couple of properties. There's an unimproved alley on the right side of that image.

Next slide, please. It'll add a little yeah. So here's the zoning. You can see the rail you'll see the railroad tracks here in a second, but you got the commercial corridor there, along Frankfurt. Next slide. So here we are with the railroad just to the south there. The unimproved alley is along. It's in between these properties here. So there's really no access for the subject property, to access in the back here other than using the, proposed area for the carport. Next slide.

So this is the front. You got the railroad tracks to the right side. Next slide. So this is the current curb cut. The proposed carport would go, along where the, current, tree is.

Next slide. Staff finds that the variances are adequately justified, and the owner can go into more detail. But I will say too that with if we can go back just a couple slides to the aerial. So the private yard area is kinda unique in this situation that the accessory structure and principal structure area kinda collide with each other. So if there are any questions about that, you know, from board members, we can go over that.

But, anyway, required actions on the last slide, are to approve or deny the variance requests for the private yard area and street side yard setback.

Thanks for the explanation on the private yard area.

And we back up on that presentation just a minute. Keep going. One more. One more. Yeah. That one. So what does that green oval depict?

That's the landscaping.

Oh, okay.

That's yeah.

I thought it was trying

to show something like where the Yeah.

No. It's was.

No. Yeah. It it kinda, you know, looks like it could be a few things.

So back up to it just again. So we're talking about where the carport the word carport showing. That's where it's against the line.

Correct. It would stop short of the if we can go back to the other slide real quick. It would stop short of that, the landscaping with the well, with the, yeah, the oval.

So that tree hasn't come out? Yes. Okay. Thank you.

And then if, you know, there are other questions, the applicant can go into that, and then we can answer others too.

Thank you. Paul Pfeifer, mister Pfeifer? Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Name and address, including ZIP code, please.

My name is Paul Pifer. I live at 101 Claremont Avenue, Louisville 40206.

Mister Pifer, do you swear the testimony you're about to give today is the truth?

I do.

Please proceed.

I

don't really have anything to add other than I do not have access to an alley on my property because of the orientation, the way the property is laid out, and that my vehicle, my truck will not physically fit into my garage. So I have no in order to protect it from the weather, I have no other alternative but to build some sort of a carport. Mhmm. My carport is a flat roof. It's not a gable or a hip.

It's gonna be about seven inches thick, and it'll be on six legs. So you'll be able to stand and look right through it. It'll just be like a sheet of paper sticking out there. That's all I have.

Okay. Members, any questions for mister Pfeifer?

Yes. Yes, please. What type of roofing are you gonna have on that?

It'll have a a metal ribbed roof.

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. And and it'll be the fascia and all will be covered with aluminum that matches the roof.

K. I believe that's all the questions. Thank you.

Okay. Yeah. Come over here. I have

any other speaker cards for this case. Is anyone online? Alright. So I'm closing the public hearing. We're in deliberations on 26Variance0041.

Any discussion or clarifications needed? Or is there a motion?

Madam chair, please. Yes. I move to approve case number 26Variance0041 based on the staff report and the analysis and the applicant and the staff, reports analysis in today's open hearing.

Thank you. Is there a

second? Second.

It's been properly moved and seconded to seconded to approve 26 variants zero zero four one. Roll call, please. Bergman? Yes. Provost? Yes. Lewis? Yes. Ford? Yes. Bond? Yes. Mr. Pfeifer, your variance has been approved.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next is 26CUP0052.

I was not here for the swearing in, so if I could get sworn in real quick.

Okay. Alright. And you swear the testimony you're about to give today is the truth?

Yes.

Alright.

Okay. So before you

So your name.

Oh, right.

And address.

Office planning, staff, Jude Mattingly, Louisville, Kentucky 40202. Before you is a if you could go to the next slide, is a, conditional use permit to allow for a crematorium and easy one zoning. Next slide, please. So the subject property is within a suburban workplace form district. It's zoned easy one, contains 0.6 acres. Again, the CUP request is for a crematory that will specialize in pet cremations. The operation will take place in an existing 5,067 square foot structure. There's no proposed construction, associated with this request. And as a result, there are no variances or waivers. Next slide, please.

Both MSD and the Department of Transportation have reviewed and provided preliminary approval. Next slide, please. Here's the zoning map. You can see it's rounded entirely by easy one zoning, and this will become important as a standard review item for the conditional use permit, but those residential, zoning and uses are over 400 feet away. Next slide, please. This is just an aerial, showing the subject site. Next slide, please. Here's the site plan, and as always, the next slide will be kind of taking a bit more of the, important materials and trying to zoom them in for you guys. Like I said, there's no new construction associated with this request. It's it's existing structures.

Next slide, please. This is the front according to Google Image Search, and this is adequately justified for approval. It's compatible with the surrounding land uses. It's located in an industrial zoning area, and it appears to meet all the standards of the conditional use permit. I know this one's a unique one that we don't see a ton. There's very few standard review items, but if you have any questions for me, I'm more than happy to try to.

Could you put up the aerial that shows the property? I know that this property is 450 feet or so from, the nearest residential property. Yes. So that is there I thought there was another aerial that showed where the residential property is. Just wanted to to get a feel for how close the nearest property is.

Yeah. So and that strip of R 4 actually is some kind of easement area. So if you were to look at, like, closest residential use, it's around, like, 450 or so. But about 400, if you just go straight from that Northwestern Corner property line to the R 4 zoning, which more than doubles the required 200 foot in the standard review.

Okay. Members, any any questions for Jude? Thank you.

Thanks.

Mister Hill?

Yes. Good afternoon. Mike Hill. Land design and development. 503 Washburn Avenue, Louisville 40222.

I swear the testimony you're about to give today is the truth.

I do.

Please proceed.

Thank you. So I'm here today, to represent veterinary specialist partners. They are the applicant in this case. In addition to to them, there should be an individual named Drew Hill who is logged in or will be. He is with Matthews Environmental Solutions, can speak very intelligently more so than me on this specific, you know, this is a pet crematory so that the activities involved in in the operations of of business for that particular land use.

So this is a conditional use permit. As mentioned, it will be utilizing existing conditions on this property. There will be no new site construction. There will be interior renovation of the existing building on the site where all the operations will take place within the existing building. No variances or waivers, are being requested. Next slide, please. So this is the zoning map of the site. Zone easy one. It's on Ulrich Avenue, in in a heavily industrial, area. And as mentioned, and this is the area that illustrates that as well, the nearest residential properties is kind of North Northwest beyond those trees.

At top of the view there, that house is about four and fifty feet away. As mentioned, the requirement is a minimum of 200 feet for this particular conditional use. Next slide. Again, just another aerial showing the existing buildings on the site. The larger brown rectangle is the existing 5,000 approximate square foot building, which will be utilized for all activities within the the the on the left side, kind of the narrow rectangle, that's more of a open lean to structure that's already on the site.

They really don't have plans to utilize it for anything specific to their business, but they don't plan on removing it either. So if they have some miscellaneous items that that they can store under the the shelter, that they'll do so. Next slide, please. So this is our development plan. Again, existing conditions. All the pavement you see is already there. Nothing nothing new is being proposed to be changed. This is the view of the site from the front, from the street. So the building with the red canopy is where all the activity will take place. This the the kind of the way this business works is this company works with local animal clinics and veterinary hospitals.

And then they go out to the different locations of these throughout the community, bring back the remains and a vehicle to the structure, pull in through that gated entrance there on the left side of the building, go around the back of the building, and drive in the building with a new garage door they're going to install. So all the activity is going to occur inside the building that you see there. Next slide, please. We're back to our development plan. We had a neighborhood meeting.

There were two representatives of two adjacent business properties that showed up, questions about just kind of general curiosity type questions. They weren't really in opposition to what we're proposing after we explained to them how the operation works and and the details of it. And that's that's basically where we're at. Again, we don't propose to to change anything on the site, other than the internal, workings of the building to accommodate their their land use. This is not a a public facing business, so there won't be random public customers coming to the site.

The employees will be really the only ones at the site, working at the site, you know, on a day to day basis. I don't know if mister Hill has no relation to me. Mister Hill has signed on or not, but he's there for questions or will be here shortly in case you all have questions about how the how the operation works.

So there will be two pieces of equipment for cremation?

Yes. There will be two two units currently. That's their that's their initial plan. It will there's potential for expansion for up to six units eventually if they desire the the if they have the demand for it and and there is the space for it. One thing I didn't mention is air pollution control district pretty heavily regulates and permits this type of use.

It came up at the neighborhood meeting, and and so we did some research into that and received comments back from air pollution control district. I don't know if those made it into your packet or not, but they basically were they didn't say anything specific to this site other than just this land use in general is is very highly regulated, and they feel very comfortable with the state and local processes in place to permit this type of use to help mitigate any kind of negative impacts on surrounding properties.

There must be other pet animal cremation facilities in the county. I'm not sure

what There are. This would not be the only one. There are several others. Metro themselves own some.

Okay. Thank you. Members, any questions for mister Hill? Yes, please. You

this company or whatever is gonna be picking up from small animal veterinarians and limited to small animal veterinarians?

Well, the the they'll they'll have a a variety of different, I guess, clients. But the the clients would typically be your your, you know, your animal hospital in your community, your vet clinic, where the service is needed. So they these individuals would drive to the different vet clinics around town as needed on and, you know, per per the demand, obviously, and and bring everything back to the site to be to be What I was trying

to differentiate is is the the retort, the burning part

Mhmm.

Is that designed for something as large as a calf or a cow or a horse?

That is likely a question for our individual if he's here.

Oh, yeah.

Okay. Mister Hill. That's mister Hill?

Yes. That's mister Hill.

Alright. Good afternoon, mister good afternoon, mister Hill. Name and address, please.

Yes. Good afternoon. My name is Drew Hill. I'm with Matthews Environmental

Solutions.

Hearing you. Say that again?

Good afternoon. My name is Drew Hill with Matthews Environmental Solutions. Can you hear me?

Yes. Can hear you better now.

Okay. Thank you.

And and your address, please?

My address is 1163 Lebanon Court, Sanford, Florida 32771.

Alright. If you raise your right hand, I'll swear you in. You swear that the testimony you're about

to give today is the truth?

I do.

Please proceed.

Yes. So, yes, you were asking questions about the retort and the size and the types of animals that will be cremated in it. The machines that we manufacture, they cremate type four waste, which is human and animal remains. We, are proposing a machine that will go into this facility that can load up to 200 pounds and create up to 50 pounds an hour. So, therefore, you're looking at small to medium sized pets, either individually one by one, or they might, want to do a communal batch, which means they'll put in multiple pets at the same time, but they won't be returning the, the cremains to the pet parents at the end of the of the cycle.

So there's two different ways that you can use these machines. We we currently got about you're asking about other facilities. We've when I did my my research, I I noticed we had about 14, PET machines in Kentucky currently, and we've got over 35 human machines, excuse me, in Kentucky currently. We operate on all seven continents. We've got over 5,000 machines, both human and pet.

We use hot hearth technology and cold hearth technology, which means that they're designed to combust and recombust the the part the products of combustion and the the burnt materials so that when they emit the emissions come out of the top of the stack, it's just a water vapor, and all of the the the products of combustion have been, and the emissions have been burned down to, to a water vapor. So, these all do comply with Kentucky DAQ requirements. We make sure that we furnish the customers with all the required paperwork so that they can, evaluate the equipment and the air permit allowance as far as emissions are concerned. And, like I said, we've got, many human Ampet machines that, undergo the same, evaluation by by Kentucky DAQ.

Thank you very much.

My pleasure.

I have a question. This may be for you. Is this building just vacant now, or are you changing the use?

No. It it is, for several years, been the home to an electric company. And they will be, I think, retiring and closing up business after a long run, and and this that's why the building's now becoming available.

Okay. But but there's no outside changes. Everything you're gonna do is gonna be inside the building.

I mean, they may do some cosmetic changes to the outside appearance. But as far as changing the square footage of the building or shape or size, they will not be doing any of that.

Okay. Thank you.

Mhmm.

I was a little curious about MSD's review of this. Are they since there is all the activity takes place in the building, it's just is MSD review focused on discharge into sewer system or I know that they did look at this.

They did look at it. They provided preliminary approval, of it, based on no new construction, no new impervious surface to detain. Their review was really quite minimal.

K. Alright. Thank you. Okay. We've heard from everyone who submitted a speaker card on this case. So at this point, I'll close the public hearing, and we'll move into deliberations on '26 c u p zero zero five two. So members, any questions on the staff report or the presentations you've heard today? Or is there a motion?

Madam chair, I'd like to make a motion.

Yes.

Please proceed.

Member Vozos, regard to case number 26CUP0052, location 925 Ulrich Avenue. Move that we approve the conditional use permit for a crematory in easy one zoning based that on the staff report and testimony heard today. And including the conditions of approval on page four of four.

Thank you. Is there a second?

Board, seconded.

And properly moved and seconded to approve 26CUP0052 as stated. Roll call, please. Gordon?

Yes.

Ford? Yes. Lewis? Yes. Bozos? Yes. Bond? Yes. The conditional use permit has been approved. Thank you. 26CUP0050.

Good afternoon. Dallas Pozinski, office planning. 444 South 5th Street, 4202. Here to discuss 26UP50. The request is for a conditional use permit to allow short term rental of a dwelling unit that is not the primary residence of the owner.

It's in the R 5 residential traditional neighborhood form. It's developed with a single family and detached garage. The request is for three bedrooms with a maximum guest would be $8.08. There is off street parking available on-site. There is one short term rental with approved COP within 600 feet of this property. Here is the zoning with residential. Say proximity map showing that to the north is 24 COP 0141. That is within 600 feet. Here is an aerial of the site. This is the subject property with the existing building.

There's a adjacent property to the south, South 6th Street. This is to the north of adjacent property. That pathway is the hilltop hilltop court. And this is a cross street with a lot of trees and foliage in the way of all the resident houses. Staff finds that it does not meet the standards of conditional use permit.

It requires relief from section 4.2 dot 63 delta in the standard review of approval. There is one short term rental with extended feet. And, given the number of short term rentals in the surrounding area, the approval request relief would contribute to an overconcentration of such uses. The required actions today is to approve or deny the conditional use permit to allow short term rental with dwelling unit, that is not with the primary residence of the owner. Any questions?

Don't believe there are any at this point. Thank you, Tyler. Thank you. Gregliasco.

Nick Gregliasco. Barn River Tablet Roberts, 1000 North Thurston Parkway, Louisville, Kentucky 40223.

Is mister Nelson going to speak also?

Yes. Potentially. He's here for questions.

Okay. Alright. So I'll swear you in

as You

swear the testimony you've got

to give today is the truth?

I do. Okay. So I've got a presentation to explain this request for the short term rental. One of the main things on this is the 600 foot rule. So I'll show both through this presentation both, one, why this falls clearly within one of the four reasons for potential relief, and then second, also why this will not result in overconcentration of short term rentals in area.

But first, as far as background, if you go to the next slide, this just shows the the logic, which is the, you know, image of the zoning of the area. It is a long so they're right off of Southern Parkway, just south of of Waterson. If we go to the next image, here's a aerial image of the property. Couple of things to note here. One is there is no direct property to the north.

There is a hilltop court there, a walking court. And then, to the would be the east or the rear, there is a a garage and then an alley between that and the neighboring home. I mentioned that just because this is a property that has, you know, a little bit more buffering because of those two things where a lot of the other homes in the area would not. They have homes directly on each side. If you go to the next slide, here's a more of a zoomed in image of that the property.

The property is the applicant has acquired it. It has put a lot of money into renovating it and and fixing it up, which I'll show in just a just a minute. So main issue, which I'll go rate to, is the 600 foot rule. And and this is the map. It shows where the the site is located.

And it shows that it is right on the the edge of that in that about if you look at the top left there, approximately maybe half of the property would be within the the 600 foot rule. So it is not a part of the property as it's referenced in the the potentials for relief, but it'll be really almost half the property. And if you go to the next image, I'll show what I was referring to as far as the potential. So when as you know, we had this 600 foot rule come into come into being. It was Brandon Cohen who originally prepared that in the ordinance.

Well, anyway, the there was always a question about when should relief be granted, and that's why we eventually amended our land development code to say, here are four situations where relief makes sense or where it would be a potential. And this is one of them, and it's the one where it's part c is as the property is within the buffer area is located on the perimeter of the buffer area with part of the property being located outside of the of the buffer area. The reason that's important is because we we measure from property line to property line. The the concept was always, well, if you're measuring for our property line, if the other short term rental was a quarter acre property, it could be a very one measurement. If it is a 20 acre property, well, it would be a lot larger.

It would still have one short term rental, but it could have more of an effect on the surrounding area. So that was the reason behind this. And if you go to the next image, I'll then kind of show that again, the map and why this one is right on the edge. If you don't mind going to yes. So this is the and you can see here that it does you know, if you were to even from property to property, it doesn't include the the whole property.

In fact, it's only a part of it or maybe approximately half of it as you can kind of see here. But in if you go to the next image, I'll show then kinda why this is important. If you actually measure from structure to structure, it's 643 feet away. So it is 43 feet more than the 600 foot. Reason this is all important is it just shows why this is not why this is a one of those four categories where, you know, potential relief should be considered.

And in this case, it it is you know, if you actually look from structure to structure, it's 43 feet more. If you go to the next next slide. So I have some pictures of the the home here. And as I mentioned, there have been a lot of renovations that have been completed. There's five slides.

If you don't mind just going through those just because I'll you know, shows the bathrooms here and then the pictures of each of the the bedrooms. It is a three bedroom home that has been updated as you see. We do have house rules because of the requirement. There would be no more than eight people irrespective because of the requirement. But this is a home that the applicant has put a lot of money into, so he's you know, wants to make sure it's taken care of and and and that.

So that's why we have those other items there with no pets and no bachelor party type requirement or those those type of rentals. If you go to the next image so one of the things that had come up, some of the at the neighborhood meetings, a couple of the persons who were there were along Hilltop Court. I just wanted to show this and that even though they're those homes, which would be to the east on Hilltop Court, they all have their vehicular access, would be the other direction east, not wouldn't be passing this one or would not be, you know, from a, you know, guests coming by vehicles that are wouldn't would be going the other direction and be coming off of 6th Street. If you go to the next image. So this goes to the the issue of the overconcentration.

We've worked on a number of these short term rentals, and you've heard quite a few. I know. But this just is a map that shows where the property is. And as you can see, that anything to the west and south would not be within that. So this is very different than you'll find in most areas of Little Metro where there's very tight, you know, circles, where there's not many locations that aren't within the 600 feet.

This is a situation where it just so happens if this was the property directly across the street, it would not be an issue or if it were maybe two properties to the south. But it just shows that there is not an overconcentration, at least in the immediate area. And if you go to the next image, I'll show another map that kinda shows the same thing. Southern Heights is a subdivision has I don't if it's a 150 or more homes in it, but there's only five in the the subdivision in total. But you can see from the areas that are in white there, all the areas that are outside the the 600 foot so that it showing it it would not result in an overconcentration.

And then if you go to the next image, this property is is close to Churchill Downs. It's one of the lures and draws for this. But this is just a for comparison purposes, the map of the short term rentals long by Churchill Downs. And you can see that there's a very tight spacing where there's almost no distance between any of the circles, very different than what we have in our situation with no issue to the to the west or south. If you go to the next image and again, this shows just a more of a zoomed out version of it, but shows how this property is right at an area where there is a a white, you know, swath there where there aren't any other short term rentals or 600 feet.

If you go to the next image, as one of the issues that always comes up is parking. This is a property that has two a two car garage, and it does have a a very long driveway with the ability to have multiple cars in it. There would always be the potential for street parking, but the point is is there is ample parking here where you often don't have ample parking in these short term rental requests. If you go to the next, that's what I have. And, again, the applicant, Jason, is here for questions specifically as to any of the details of his work on the house or things of that nature.

For mister Preglea.

I've got some I got a question. How did the neighborhood meeting go? How many people showed up? Were there concerns, issues?

There were concerns raised, but mainly it was just not wanting to have a a rental, you know, near the their their homes. The point is is that this is was a you know, all we're talking about is not the ability to have it as a rental. It's just whether it should be a could be a short term rental, a lot lesser than thirty days. And the there's some concerns that referenced as to the parking, which is why I wanted to show the fact that we would have plenty of off street parking for the if the maximum number of guests is eight, we have plenty of of room for that as well. But as far as the number of people, I don't know. There may have been 15 or so around right around that that attended that meeting.

Is this the applicant's only short term rental, or do they have others in town?

Or Well, if you don't mind, let me I can let him address that because I don't want to misstate his the the number of in his management experience in that, if you don't mind.

You're right. Yeah. Name and address, please.

Jason Nelson. It's 4513 South 6th Street.

ZIP code? 40214. Please proceed.

The question again?

Yes. This is this your first short term rental? Do you

have others?

And, are you,

you know have several other long term rentals. This would

be the first short term. Okay.

How do you plan to manage? Are you going to manage it? Are you going to hire a management company?

Some of both. I have a management company for the long term rentals. But some of both. I have family in the area. I'm on in that corridor several times a week. I'm local. Not a long distant owner.

Okay. So so your residence is within twenty five minutes of the property?

Or Yes.

Okay.

Any anyone else? Yes.

Yeah. Laura Ferguson, assistant county attorney. One of the questions I had was in the staff report on page eight, it looks like there's a 16 CUP 1 0 5 1 near Ashland just outside the 600 foot, and I didn't see it on the applicant's presentation. So I didn't know if that CUP was still good or whether it should have been shown on that staff report. It's outside the 600 feet, but it's not far outside the 600 feet. Yeah.

Yeah. It was, there, but it's, I'll let Tyler confirm. It was but it's no longer active. Is that right, Tyler?

That is correct. It's been, revoked because it didn't in the area.

Hadn't shown it in the general area, and I just wanna make sure we have

So it's it's an issue of layers on the mapping system.

And then and then the question I had for the applicant is, we you talked about the overconcentration of short term rentals, and it says and or, so you don't necessarily have to talk about it. But I was just interested if you had anything about adversely affect the affordable housing stock

Or you

were just collecting the overconcentration.

Yes. So the affordable housing component of it, this is a property where the applicant has acquired it and put a lot of money renovating it, etcetera. So as far as making it an affordable unit or lower rent, it would not qualify for that right now. It would be as far as from the affordable perspective. So really more of this one seem to be the overconcentration issue. And that's what staff had to comment in the staff report, you know, related to that.

Okay. Thank you.

I think I know they answered this question, but it's for staff. That other CUP that's within the 600 foot is an active licensed Yes. Correct. Short term rental. Okay.

Okay. And this is a question for staff as well for Tyler. The staff did not support the

No. We didn't.

CUP. And you are aware that sixteen CUP ten fifty one was no longer active.

Correct. Yes.

Okay. Alright. Thank you. Okay. I have speaker cards for those who are speaking in opposition to this case. And after they speak, of course, Mr. Pregleiosko, you and the app you would have an opportunity for rebuttal. Ms. Rui? Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Thank you. So my name is Betsy Rui. I live at 4902 Southern Parkway.

ZIP code, please.

40214.

Thank you. Mister Rui, do you swear the testimony you're about to

give today is the truth?

Yes. I do. Please proceed.

Okay. Thank you very much. So I don't normally present before these commissions and boards because I choose to let the process play out. But in this instance, there is an overlap there, and he is asking for a variance. And in our metro council office, we are finding new CUP permits coming in every week.

And as I looked at the map that mister Nelson put up on the board there, they were noting, how few CUPs there were. But in my perspective, I'm looking at it and seeing how many there are in a city, in a neighborhood where we don't have enough housing as it is already. So my big concern is making sure that we have sufficient housing available for those who choose to live here. And it disturbs me very much to see our housing stock being taken up, on a for profit basis and not housing for people who choose to live here. So that's why I am asking to oppose the variants.

Thank you. Thank you. Members, any questions for miss miss Rui? Thank you, ma'am. Thank you.

Bethany Smith. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Name and address, please.

Bethany Smith. 4508 South 6th Street.

ZIP code, please. 4214. Miss Smith, do you swear the testimony you're about to give today is the truth? I do. Okay. And if you could speak a little louder into the microphone.

Yeah. Yeah. I would just echo what miss Rory has said. We have a lot of short term rentals in the neighborhood, what feels like a lot. I do live across the street. It does look great. The renovations look wonderful. I think it looks like it would be a wonderful home for someone to live in. But I don't yeah. The neighborhood does not need more short term rentals, especially since we have others close by.

Could you speak a little bit about the character of the neighborhood? Sorry? Could you speak a little bit about the character of the neighborhood?

Sure. Yeah. We've lived there for almost seven years. It's a lot of families on the street, older like, couples, families with young children, longtime residents who've been there for quite a while.

K. Members, any questions for miss Smith? Thank you. I have a speaker card for Remington Smith. Good afternoon. Hi. Name and address, please.

Remington Smith, 4508 South 6th Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40214.

You swear the testimony you're about to give today is the truth? Yes. Please proceed.

I would just hope that you all listen to your staff report about this. I wanna note a couple of things. My wife and I have lived at the address since 2019. This was before the pandemic. We spent a year trying to find a house in the South End.

Specifically, as somebody who lived there for a while as a kid, I knew that was an area where there's not a lot of turnover. And part of it is because in this exact situation, usually people only leave maybe if there's a big life event, and then a family moves in, and then they stay put. So I also want to note that in the display of the STRs, maybe those were just the ones that they had, for CUPs, but that does not include the primary residents who are also renting those out occasionally for Derby. So there are other STRs in the area, but they aren't applying for the CUP. They live there.

So I think you need to look at both of those map layers, I think, to look at the concentration. But if we're, the conditions for it are 600 feet and it's within 600 feet, We're concerned about affordability, and affordability has only gotten worse since the pandemic. I don't think this meets, the threshold. And I think especially to the character of the neighborhood, yeah, we need more housing availability, especially since we're only a mile away from Churchill Downs. I worry that if this CUP is approved, then other people might buy up properties. And instead of offering them to families, other people will buy them out just to, rent out for Derby. So

Thank you.

Alright. Thank you.

Alright. Mister Pregliasco, you have.

We have one person on

the line.

There is someone online. Okay. Katie? Hi. Are you speaking in opposition? You're you're muted.

Okay. Sorry about that.

Yes. Are you speaking in opposition?

Yes. I am.

Name and address, please.

Yes. It's Katie or Catherine Reed, 2 Hilltop Court 40214.

And your last name again, please? Reed, r e a d. Thank you. Do you raise your right hand? I'll swear you in. Do Do you swear the testimony you're about

to give today is the truth?

Yes.

What would you like to share with the board?

So I had written a letter to the board as well and hope that it was received. So we bought our house to Hilltop Court, which shares a property line with the the property that is proposing a CUP. Basically, we are the first house when you enter the walking court from 6th Street. So the person who lived there before, Keith, he was there for, you know, thirty years. Many of our neighbors are there for that long, and we bought this house as our forever home.

So we have two young children, a nine year old and a three year old. There are other young families on the court as well as seniors that have been there for thirty years, and we all take care of each other. We mow each other's yards, and we, you know, look out for one another. It's just a very, very unique and tight knit situation. We know all of our neighbors, on 6th Street and across the street on 6th Street. We know Remington and Bethany. Their neighbor, Dara, is my business partner. And we, you know, like, we we all chose to live there because there is a strong sense of community. We let our kids just go outside and play in the court. If you're not familiar with what a walking or pedestrian court is, it doesn't have a road in front of it.

And there are eight homes on our court and eight homes on Maple Court, which is directly behind us. And there's no road that goes through, you know, in between our houses. And we chose this, for community while others chose it for privacy. And the people who have lived there for a long time, I mean, these houses hardly ever go up for sale until someone dies, honestly. The person whose house was bought up by Jason here, he passed away from cancer, and we all knew him.

And my neighbor to the right, Number 4 On Hilltop Court, she also passed away. And then a single mom with a teenage daughter moved in. And we know her and we take care of each other and we get each other's mail and we watch out for each other when, you know, the other one goes out of town. And it's we're a very, very tight knit community. We can count on the fact that we know the people walking through our court.

We know the people who are walking their dogs. We, you know, we all work together as a community, and honestly, we just do not want a revolving door of strangers coming in and out of a house that literally their fence is in our driveway. It just doesn't make us feel very warm and fuzzy. And I know you can't control your neighbors, but we would 100% rather have a long term rental there, a family renting that home, or someone who is able to purchase that home. I have friends who have been looking in our neighborhood, specifically right around the courts or right around 6th Street because we have such a good walkability getting to the coffee shop or the library or whatever, and they're unable to find anything.

It's so competitive. There's a house three doors down from this house that's that was purchased after, by the way, just fifteen days of being on the market. So not really a substantial amount of time during winter when people aren't usually buying.

That's that's time, ma'am. That's time.

Okay. Thank you.

I I said my piece. Thank you.

Alright. Mister Pregleiosko, you have five minutes for a rebuttal.

And do you mind pulling up one of the slide that I have that showed the it's the first slide of the that showed the 600 foot map. So I wanted to go back to that because some of what we've heard is concerns over whether Louisville should have short term rentals and how many, and what how much how should we keep them apart? And I say that is is that if we decide if locally we decided we didn't want to have any short term rentals, we could have this a thousand feet or 2,000 feet, etcetera. We decided to have it for 600 foot, but we did also say there's certain situations where relief should be considered. And this is one of those specific situations where relief should be considered.

As to the so the resident, the Smiths who are across the street, which would be on the other side of six, I guess, What's interesting there is they could have a short term rental of their property by right or about right, but they would they would be with they could they would not be within 600 feet, neither would all the homes on either side of them or in and if you go to the next, I guess, two slides forward, I'll show then one more, if you don't mind. The one more. Sorry. The well, actually, you go back to so it's the one that shows the the map that has shows how there is a a area that is where there is a lack of short term rentals. Yes.

Exactly. So what my point is is that we're talking about whether there should be short term rentals in here. And the only reason this one is pulled in is because a portion of the properties within it, but all the properties across 6 or even, you know, seventh, those those ones would all would not be, I say seven. I don't know that is. The point is is this is just a a technicality that because of how we measure it, a part of the property is within that 600 feet.

And I think what we're saying is is this is a situation where it just makes sense to allow this, and and it would not result in an overconcentration in the immediate area. And as to the comments regarding the the court, you know, the the court does provide additional buffering. I see that there is not a home right next to it, but there is a court, an open space. And Katie who spoke last had mentioned that, you know, choose that because of, you know, privacy or that the court provides. I mean, the point is is it is additional buffering so that you don't have a short term rental rate next to another one.

But we do believe that this this falls within the clearly, what was intended by those potential scenarios for relief, and we just ask that you, you know, consider approval of this. Without taking any questions that you may have.

There are don't believe there are any of this. Thank you. So we've heard from everyone who submitted a speaker card. At this point, I'll close the public hearing. We'll move into deliberations on twenty six c u p zero zero five zero.

Members, any discussion on the staff report, the testimony you've heard?

I can just make a comment.

Yes, please.

Yes. So I'm very familiar with the area. I don't really see any reason to go against the staff report and and give grant relief. You know, it's a very unique location as far as being adjacent to this pedestrian court, you know, which is just like I don't know if you guys are familiar with any these. There's a few of them around town, you know.

There's some in the Highlands, some in the West End. It's just kind of like a little Mayberry within a neighborhood, know. It's just like this little pocket. And I don't think this use is compatible with that even though it's I just I just don't think it's compatible. Though thinking out loud, the alternatives for, the owner would be, you know, like a long term rental obviously would be allowed and like traveling nurses or something like that.

So there could be that kind of revolving door of of new people coming in and out of the neighborhood. So, you know, there's no there's no perfect scenario for for the neighbors. But obviously, other than getting a family in there that's going to rent it or someone who would purchase it.

Do you have a comment?

Attorney Ferguson? I'm just going to say that,

you know, the medium term is more than thirty days, so it's less than a year, but more than Right. Right. So that that that's allowed right now. You don't need a conditional use permit for that.

Right. That would

It's really a question of does the board think that the applicant's justification for granting relief from the 600 foot rule, or are you persuaded by it? Is really where it comes down.

Like to hear from the other members.

Well, I'll echo part of what was said. I I mean, it's it's at least half out. I don't hear an argument to go with it. At the same time, I think the neighbors have to recognize you can't control who's gonna live there, whether they're long term renters, medium term renters, or short term renters unless someone bought the property to live in. And even then, you can't control who the who your neighbor is.

It sounds like they have a very close knit neighborhood, and it's worked perfectly so far. But that's nothing we can guarantee regardless of what our vote is. But I think there is reason for the 600 foot rule and except in those cases where it just barely touches the corner of it or it meets some of the other items of relief, I I don't see any reason to violate that 600 foot rule. So I don't I don't support it.

Thank you. Anyone else?

I concur.

I think you said it will.

Alright. Is anyone ready to make a motion?

I'll make a motion. It's member Vozos with regard to case number 26CUP0050, location 4513 South 6th Street. I move that we deny the request for conditional use permit to allow short term rental of a dwelling unit that is not the primary residence of the owner based that on the staff report, testimony, and discussion heard today.

Thank you. Is there a second?

And you're and you believe that the applicant hasn't provided sufficient justification for Correct.

Based

on the distance and the overconcentration?

Yes.

Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Forward. It's been properly moved and seconded to deny 26 CUP zero zero five zero for the reasons as stated in the clarification on the motion.

Roll call, please. Horton?

Yes.

Lewis? Yes. Bozos? Yes. Ford?

Yes.

Bond?

Yes. The CUP has been denied. Last item on the agenda, 26CUP0069.

Zach Schwager, office of planning. This is a conditional use permit for a short term rental that isn't the primary residence of the host. It's in the R 4 Zoning District, Neighborhood Forum District. There are three three bedrooms, which would allow for eight guests maximum off street parking for four vehicles, and there aren't any approved CUPs within 600 feet of the subject property. This is the zoning of the area in the subject property, and an up close aerial of the subject property.

This is the front, and then this is looking west, and then across Cartlidge Court, and then east. Staff findings that it's adequately justified. It's in a residential area. There isn't a 600 foot issue, and all standards of the conditional use permit seem to have been met. And then the required action is to approve or deny the request for a conditional use permit for the short term rental. Are there any questions?

Thank you. Yeah.

Christopher Rodriguez. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Name and address, please.

Christopher Rodriguez. 7735 3rd Street Road, 40214.

Mister Rodriguez, do you swear the testimony you're about to give today is the truth? Yes, ma'am. Please proceed.

So we're okay. So good afternoon, members of the board. My name is Christopher Rodriguez. I'm representing both Juan and Angelica Rodriguez, my parents. They're the owners of 5529 Cartlidge Court, 40214.

We're here regarding our short term rental application. We want to assure the board that we will we will follow all all local short term rental regulations, including occupancy limits, parking requirements, and noise rules. We will be respectful of the neighborhood and responding quickly to any issues. We also live, like, within a five minute drive, so we will be taking care of any issues, if if any issues do occur. And we're requesting approval of our short term rental permit.

Thank you for your time. Thank you. Could you tell us a little bit about the neighborhood meeting?

Yeah. Oh, yeah. We oh, sorry.

Oh,

we had one, and, one of our neighbors, I forgot his name, but he came and showed up. And he he just showed up because he got, like, the the letter, and he was just curious about what was going on and stuff. And then we we gave him a little house house tour, gave him some chips, and he just shook our hands, and that's that's all. Like yeah. No one else showed up.

Is this your first short term rental? Yes, ma'am. And how will it be managed for

you? Yes, ma'am. You will be managed. Me and all my family members. We live five minutes away from from this house. Alright.

And you have house rules?

Yeah. You have house rules. No parties, no alcohol, no pets. It's more so it's like a quiet neighborhood as well. And in the back, we have a bonfire. Just, you know, something just, you know, just to chill, I guess.

Are you aware of the requirements for registration? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Alright. Members, questions?

Did you provide that neighbor with your contact information in case there is issues?

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

Anything else, members? Alright. That's the only speaker card I have for this case. Thank you, sir. Thank you for your time. No one on mine. Alright. So at this point, I'll close the public hearing. We're in deliberations on 26 C U P 0069. Short term rental that's not the primary residence of the owner. Any discussion?

Question for Steph.

Yes. What? Yes.

On page five of our notes that were sent, the site is identified, but across the street and two lots over, there's a lot or something delineated. What is that?

Different zone, I think. Not both of Yeah. I think I think it's a different zoning classification, isn't it?

Based on the shading, my guess is it's c one because there's a c one further north that has a sense of the shading.

If we went back to the power point, I think there there is a property that zoned office residential where it's it's shown in like a green or teal.

We don't have color.

Oh, what? That's part of the problem.

That's yeah. I think that's what it is, though. There is yeah. Oh, That's just a different zoning classification.

Okay. That's good. Thank you.

Yeah. So it's parallelogram.

Other questions or discussion?

And maybe this is for Zach, but the applicant is aware of these conditions of approval?

Yes. And then I'll talk with him afterward.

Okay. Yeah.

All right. Is there a motion on twenty six CUP sixty nine?

I'll make the motion. Yeah.

Yes, Mr. Vozos.

Thank you. With regard to case number 26CUP69, Location 5529 Cartilage Court. We approve the conditional use permit to allow the short allow short term rental of a dwelling unit that is not the primary residence of the owner based on the staff report, testimony heard today and the two conditions. I want to bring attention to two conditions on page seven of seven, maximum of eight guests at any one time and to register within thirty days.