[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6533543,"mediaKeyId","3731098-18a5d7c289b2f4d8eac1495e95642622","parentId",3731098,"title","Board hears multiple short‑term rental requests; staff and rural‑land easement dispute shapes decisions","audioSeconds",456,"startMs",11300000,"endMs",11756000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3731098-18a5d7c289b2f4d8eac1495e95642622&start=11300&end=11756","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3731098-18a5d7c289b2f4d8eac1495e95642622/thumbnail_11300000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6533543/Lexington-City/Fayette-County/Kentucky/Board-hears-multiple-shortterm-rental-requests-staff-and-ruralland-easement-dispute-shapes-decisions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6533543-98c20ea1bd751b7d63d0c1ee10cae1b8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437827&Signature=CBdJ04fj0YStw7xEBepioxYs4YDb03px4ax37hMJuEZG5HtKY7EXEAbLjVUc7gVX7Jkj36eG8tAqRcjHrD-ag8Ha0lkiv41GVj1h7WVtIadKuS0xEuA--Q~fyCXy8RY08H4-RBpIlPtoA4fPFKbz78UZ5XW3klrevqYsT5B2LBLieHF0LiQNq4o~dkONCuOaF5-axn-bmAm6vCye-aqBZ757R2Uxks~sw9~QtCW-iR-Z538DuRtiBlz3OQwz3Uupg8vOLajY2aJc5AvnmWWFLjge6z1QBR1xQVSKu72EtV-0MGC13FIAbFL0uKDnN80o8gGrQUOnN9S9nyKQE9SUnA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Lexington","date","2025-06-09T00:00:00Z","article","The Lexington‑Fayette Urban County Board of Adjustment on June 1 took up several short‑term rental (STR) requests and related conditional‑use permits. The hearing highlighted two competing rules: the zoning code’s STR spacing and concentration limits, and the limits written into permanent purchase‑of‑development‑rights (PDR) easements that may prohibit commercial uses of conserved farmland.

PDR easement vs zoning: the most contested case involved a parcel subject to a PDR easement. Planning staff recommended disapproval because the property is restricted by a recorded PDR easement held by the Fayette County Rural Land Management Board and the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Beth Overman, director of the rural land management board, told the board the recorded easement specifically prohibits “commercial or industrial uses” not explicitly reserved in the deed and that NRCS concurs. An NRCS official emailed staff during the review period saying short‑term rentals would be a prohibited activity under the recorded deed. The applicant and his attorney argued the property had been used as short‑term lodging since 2019 and that a zoning compliance permit was denied because staff had not finalized the AR‑zone rule changes then under consideration; they said the prior use should be treated as a legal nonconforming use. Board members debated whether a recorded public easement is a threshold legal issue the board can decide and whether the case should be continued while the parties seek a written determination from the land‑management board and NRCS or pursue a court declaration. After extended discussion a motion to adopt staff’s recommended disapproval was moved and then failed; the board did not adopt staff’s recommendation at the hearing and the matter remained unresolved at the close of the session pending further administrative or legal steps.

Other STR decisions recorded at the hearing:
- PLNBOA25‑53 (Dr. Thomas Larkin, short‑term rental at 2751 Military Pike): Approved. The owner confirmed the detached guest‑house plumbing connects to the same septic system and planning staff recommended approval; the board voted to grant the conditional‑use permit subject to the usual conditions attached to STR approvals.
- PLNBOA25‑54 (Loralee/Laura Lee Trim, unhosted STR at 401 Redding Road, Unit 6): Approved. The applicant reviewed and accepted four staff conditions; with no public opposition the board approved the conditional use permit.
- PLNBOA25‑56 (Jonathan Rollins): Staff had recommended disapproval and the case was placed on the heard docket. At the time of this transcript the board heard the case; the transcript shows planning staff had recommended disapproval but does not include a final roll‑call approval/denial recorded in the public minutes here. (See the official minutes for the formal vote.)

What the board and residents focused on: When STRs touch preserved farmland the hearing turned into a technical review of recorded deed language and who has the authority to interpret and enforce it. The rural land management board and NRCS said the recorded PDR deed explicitly prohibits short‑term rentals; the applicant said the property was in use for STR purposes before the easement and prior county practice allowed similar uses. Planning staff said the zoning ordinance does allow some STRs in AR zones but that those approvals must not conflict with a recorded public easement; staff told the board a letter from NRCS and the rural land board’s interpretation made the PDR restriction a threshold issue that should be resolved before the BOA grants permission.

Board members pressed legal staff for guidance about whether the BOA should accept or reject an interpretation by another public agency (the land management board), and legal counsel advised caution: because the federal government and the rural land board are parties to the recorded easement, the board should avoid issuing a permit that would be inconsistent with the deed without a definitive determination from the easement holders or a court.

The hearing also recorded several routinely approved STRs and a number of cases where planning staff and owners were able to resolve or accept conditions for approval. For the contested AR‑zone case the hearing ended with further administrative and possible legal steps required before the board could adopt a clear outcome.

Votes at a glance (items discussed at the June 1 hearing; vote outcomes appear as recorded in the meeting transcript):
- PLNBOA25‑53 (Dr. Thomas Larkin, 2751 Military Pike): approved (motion passed at hearing).
- PLNBOA25‑54 (Laura Lee Trim, 401 Redding Road, Unit 6): approved (motion passed at hearing).
- PLNBOA25‑56 (Jonathan Rollins): staff recommended disapproval; transcript does not show a final recorded outcome in the public part of this hearing (consult official minutes for final action).
- PLNBOA25‑41 (Chad Walker, 5167 Briar Hill Road — AR zone): staff recommended disapproval based on a PDR easement; the board debated the threshold question of the easement. A motion to adopt staff’s recommendation failed at the hearing; the matter remained unresolved in the transcript and may require administrative resolution with the rural land board, NRCS, or court action before a final BOA decision.

What to watch next: any subsequent submission by applicants or written determinations from the Rural Land Management Board or NRCS. Where recorded easements conflict with zoning, the board will look for either an explicit release or written concurrence from the easement holder, or a court‑ordered interpretation, before approving an STR that contradicts deed restrictions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Lexington - Board of Adjustment Meeting - Jun 09, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At the June 1 Board of Adjustment hearing the panel handled multiple short‑term rental matters and a dispute over whether a recorded PDR easement prohibits STR activity at one Arlington‑area farm; the board approved two STRs in other locations and left at least one contested AR‑zone case unresolved while parties seek written determinations.","taxTitle","Lexington City, Fayette County, Kentucky","taxId",5707,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6533548,"Board denies conditional-use permit for rooftop live entertainment at 2 Fisted Willys after neighbors object",2632,5617000,8249000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3731098-18a5d7c289b2f4d8eac1495e95642622&start=5617&end=8249","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3731098-18a5d7c289b2f4d8eac1495e95642622/thumbnail_5617000.jpg","/articles/6533548/Lexington-City/Fayette-County/Kentucky/Board-denies-conditional-use-permit-for-rooftop-live-entertainment-at-2-Fisted-Willys-after-neighbors-object","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6533548-6dede4ecc6d596244e78c9197373cc24/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437827&Signature=Muesh3nNu1FZ2k60Z1ccADYE9grYeOpqaLXvlgB~tFSkLqJ7CiHrIWZCB9c3rM6d2DSQ52qk70qXOsUxsOGn~k5YddtL6~ELKMCAuydTwL6U8Yyma67mShPnqXTgsWWAF1kjRpY4RKcJfJt4TOMtByRZJXkDwHREB0MOk84UdYDK-BqECqGw5iBbJXs80mzISVnotGmcQvcOVEyqxt4VFCA3fmvpYLXDSy9737Ei~qWbAg0KZcApUfft6hhAawFOCrfSJxYhBEaAvhWQTkYfAh7NGezbpezfeqDimu~kXl8W6TA0jiqonbEMl2Gy0sXIoN0olwEC2cjD29Mbl1-Q2w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Board of Adjustment voted to deny a permit for outdoor live entertainment at 2 Fisted Willys, a tavern in a neighborhood business node, after planning staff argued the venue would put amplified sound too close to residential properties and after several nearby residents urged denial.

Planning staff described the rooftop location as “significant concern” because the elevated, mostly unbuffered setting would project sound toward surrounding homes. Staff noted the city’s noise‑disturbance ordinance and enforcement limitations; a 2023 review found many noise complaints but few citations because officers often arrived after the sound had been turned down or off. “Approval of this conditional use and variance would negatively impact the health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding area,” staff concluded, and recommended disapproval.

Owner Bill Ransdell and the venue’s attorney, John Whittall, asked the board for permission to host seasonal acoustic performances and described outreach to neighbors before filing. Whittall said the proposal was for low‑amplitude, one‑guitar acoustic sets, with an upper time limit and sound‑monitoring by a hired engineer. “All we seek to do here is to… put a guitarist up here seasonally,” Whittall said. He told the board he expected music to end no later than about 10:30 p.m. on days with outdoor sound.

About a dozen neighbors and the district council member spoke against the application, saying amplified music on the rooftop would travel farther than proponents suggested and would reduce year‑round livability. “By the time the sound reaches Woodland Avenue, it will be no louder than 80 decibels,” the applicant’s materials claimed; neighbors and staff said measurements at street level and accounts of prior music suggested higher impacts. Council Member Hannah Legree told the board she received many constituent complaints about noise from the venue’s current operations and favored staff’s recommendation.

Residents described the area as a mixed neighborhood with retirees, families and students and said the rooftop sits within tens of feet of homes. Multiple speakers said they could already hear interior music through the venue’s open doors and believed outdoor amplified sound would be worse.

After public comment the board took a motion to adopt staff’s recommendation of disapproval; the board voted to deny the permit. Board members cited the small distance between the rooftop and surrounding homes, the lack of a natural buffer, and practical limits of noise enforcement as reasons to side with residents’ concerns.

The decision does not change the restaurant and bar’s indoor operations; it only denies permission to use the rooftop for outdoor amplified live entertainment. The venue can pursue non‑amplified, unamplified or indoor music in conformance with existing rules, or return with a new proposal that addresses buffering, hours, and a sound‑mitigation plan acceptable to staff and the community.

Votes at a glance: board denied the conditional‑use permit for outdoor live entertainment at 2 Fisted Willys; staff recommendation of disapproval was adopted.","After staff recommended disapproval and residents raised noise and quality‑of‑life concerns, the Board of Adjustment voted to deny a conditional‑use permit for outdoor live entertainment at 2 Fisted Willys' rooftop venue.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6533552,"Board approves variance so homeowner can keep enlarged deck after trimming encroaching sections",2737,1697000,4434000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3731098-18a5d7c289b2f4d8eac1495e95642622&start=1697&end=4434","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3731098-18a5d7c289b2f4d8eac1495e95642622/thumbnail_1697000.jpg","/articles/6533552/Lexington-City/Fayette-County/Kentucky/Board-approves-variance-so-homeowner-can-keep-enlarged-deck-after-trimming-encroaching-sections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6533552-960aeb075a187b28631671d927494ca1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437827&Signature=hDOaur4r8wpQfx8gfJZyscRhco3YCD7P16P7DljMZFPav7T59ZrsIixvtyMmNqpJ6VFLUQfDxpZcKe-tnZoMk526szBAugo1-DiCu5hYpdma6a1T9uOQw4enrcEi7Fdii5CSWMGdM0nSly-4b293Ha2Wc2nFA4gCXrQBdLTFLhjyJUGUbLwFT2gk2p6G0bTizJTtfY5o6hugBcO6dyp-A5h8~xhjyTifIHXx3oJsEPUhIEYUBWwBgYtDon8pVcc06TssGeAEsC01DP7g6jqkbQTBmf1WTA59XCS6YmWohjMjdGzpQpS7BjtbSKyeLohV6Au5IqruR71TBK0eWB54Ww__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Board of Adjustment on June 1 approved variances allowing a homeowner to retain most of a recently rebuilt deck at 624 Andover Village Place, provided the owner cuts back portions that encroach on adjacent property and obtains required encroachment permits.

Staff presented the case as a retrofit of a decades-old nonconforming deck that had been rebuilt without completing required variances and encroachment approvals. Planning staff said they disapproved the full variance request because the deck as built could impede access for fire and emergency services, but recommended a lesser rear-yard variance that would allow the owner to keep an enlarged deck closer to the rear property line than current regulations allow.

The applicant, Manuel Lijar, told the board the original deck had stood for more than 30 years, said he hired a contractor who assured him permits were taken care of, and described efforts he has taken since learning of the problem. “Since I became aware of the requirements I've taken actions and ownership of every step, and will continue until any and all issues are addressed,” Lijar said during his presentation. He said the homeowner association had granted written permission for the work and asked the board to avoid requiring a full demolition that would cost an estimated $7,500 to rebuild.

Neighbors who spoke at the hearing — including several who said they live within a few houses of the property — generally supported the owner, describing the new deck as a safety improvement and saying the nearest neighboring house on one side is about 30 feet away. “I view this deck as a substantial improvement to the property values because it's a lovely deck,” said Miriam Secon, whose home backs up nearby.

Board members pressed staff and the owner on emergency access, utility easements and whether the structure encroached on HOA green space and on a sanitary sewer easement. Planning staff said parts of the deck extend over the original property line and, in at least one location, over a sanitary sewer easement; staff recommended a reduced (lesser) rear-yard variance to preserve an 8-foot rear setback that had existed historically while requiring other corrections so emergency access is not impeded.

The board voted to approve the variances with a set of conditions adopted during the hearing. The owner agreed to: remove any portions of the deck that physically encroach on adjoining privately owned parcels; remove portions that intrude into HOA green space; provide clear, unobstructed access on the north side of the house by removing specified landscaping so emergency services could access the rear of the property; and secure required encroachment permits from utilities and the Division of Water Quality before finalizing the work.

Board members added the standard permit conditions and clarified that the board was approving the lesser variance reflected in the staff packet rather than the larger, unpermitted footprint the owner had built. The motion to approve was made by a board member and seconded; the motion passed and the chair closed the item.

The approval includes explicit follow‑up steps: the applicant must obtain encroachment permits and confirm the sanitary sewer/easement issues are resolved before the deck work is finalized. The board made clear that retaining the deck as revised depends on the owner meeting those conditions.

The applicant and several neighbors told the board they would work with staff and the HOA on the necessary paperwork and on physically trimming any elements that lie beyond the legal property line. The board’s action preserved much of the current deck while requiring the owner to remove or alter the specific parts that extend beyond his legal lot lines and to secure required permits.

Votes at a glance: the motion to approve the variances and the amended conditions passed; the board instructed staff to verify encroachment and easement approvals before issuing final sign-offs.

The board will monitor compliance through the permitting process; if required encroachment permits or easement corrections are not secured, the owner could face further enforcement action or be required to alter the deck further.","After public comment and a staff safety review, the Lexington-Fayette Board of Adjustment approved variances for a deck at 624 Andover Village Place, requiring the owner to remove portions that extend onto neighbors' or HOA land and secure encroachment permits.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board hears multiple short‑term rental requests; staff and rural‑land easement dispute shapes decisions

Board denies conditional-use permit for rooftop live entertainment at 2 Fisted Willys after neighbors object

Board approves variance so homeowner can keep enlarged deck after trimming encroaching sections