ON MONDAY, MAY 5TH, 2008, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HELD A MEETING IN THE 2ND FLOOR COURTROOM OF THE WOODFORD COUNTY COURTHOUSE TO HEAR THE FOLLOWING APPEALS:

Chairman Sam Dozier III opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. with those being in attendance as follows:

MEMBERS PRESENT: Sam Dozier, David Prewitt, Frank Stark, Jennifer Steen, and Tim Turney

CONSULTANTS PRESENT: Tim Butler, Legal Counsel, Paul W. Noel, Jr., Building & Zoning Inspector and Petra T. Dotson, Recording Clerk.

MINUTES: Tim Turney moved, as seconded by David Prewitt, to accept the April 7th, 2008 minutes as distributed. Motion carried with all members voting ‘aye’.

NEW BUSINESS:

PUBLIC HEARING: DIMENSIONAL VARIANCE : Timothy Grimes- 153

05-008-2008 Gleneagles Way-R-1(B) Zoning District – Section 706.6- Applicant is seeking a 25 ft. front yard set back from the required 30 ft. set back in order to place a 6 ft. fence 5 feet from the right-of-way on the corner lot.

Sam Dozier introduced the applicant’s request and requested Paul Noel elaborate further.

Paul Noel explained the applicant is seeking a 25 ft. front yard set from the required 30 ft. set back in order to place a 6 ft. fence 5 feet from the side of the walk on the corner lot. He also noted there is no residence behind the applicant’s home, just across the road on each side. The fence would offer no impediment to the sight line.

Sam Dozier asked if the applicant wanted to address the board for which he responded no. Sam Dozier asked the board members if they had any questions and they responded no. Sam Dozier requested the board either approve or deny this variance.

Member Steen moved to approve as seconded by Prewitt. Motion carried 5-0 in favor.

OTHER BUSINESS:

MATTER ON REMAND: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Versailles United

08-114-2004 Methodist Church, Inc. – Northeast corner of Paynes Mill Road and Lexington Road- A-1 Zoning District – Section 701.4 (L) - Applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit in order to build a church and associated buildings in an agricultural zoned area.

Chairman Dozier allowed Tim Butler, attorney to the Board of Adjustment, to speak to this matter. Mr. Butler explained that this matter was to be reconsidered on remand from Woodford Circuit Court. The Board was to consider the matter but it was not a public hearing contrary to what was advertised in the paper. Mr. Butler provided the Board a background to the case:

Back in September 2004 the Board had a hearing on a Conditional Use Permit requested by Versailles United Methodist Church. At the meeting in October of 2004 the Board adopted a motion to approve the Conditional U se Permit for the church with conditions. That motion was based primarily on findings relating to the RLUPA (Religious Land Use Institutionalized Person Act). There was a lawsuit filed challenging the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit and back in February of 2007 the Court Of Appeals sent the matter back to the Board for additional findings. The Board adopted supplemental findings back in April 2007 based on Tim Butler’s reading of the Court Of Appeals opinion. In April of this year, Judge Johnson disagreed with Mr. Butler’s narrow reading and remanded it back to the Board with direction that the Board be allowed to take whatever action the y deem as appropriate. Judge Johnson further stated he wanted to make sure the Board was clear in that they be allowed to take whatever action they deem as appropriate. At the Circuit Court hearing in April 2008, Mr. Hank Graddy, attorney for the opposition to this request specifically asked that he be allowed to address the Board at the June meeting and argue matters of law before the Board. Mr. Butler indicated that Mr. Graddy sent him the same request in writing. The Judge said the Board could hear such arguments if they so choose but the Judge was not requiring the Board do that. Mr. Butler explained that the consideration tonight is an attempt to resolve this case once and for all. In order to do so he recommended the Board address several questions and those answers will determine what course of action to take. The questions asked by Mr. Butler were as follows:

Question No. 1- Does the Board want to hear additional comments from the parties and/or the public? Put another way, is the record as previously constituted sufficient and/or is clarification needed? Mr. Butler explained that if the Board wanted to open the matter up for comment he recommended it be open to all and have a new hearing scheduled so that the process can be started to obtain additional comments supplementing the existing record or generating a new record. Mr. Butler also indicted however, that the Board could hear the comments from attorney for the parties only at their next meeting if they so choose. The Board members were asked to raise their hand if they wish to seek any additional comment or clarification to the record by the public or the attorneys. In response to this question, none of the Board members raised their hands. Mr. Butler then asked the members to raise their hands if they were not in favor of hearing additional comments. All members raised their hands as not being in favor of hearing additional comments.

Question No. 2 - The members were asked if they wanted to change their decision based on the existing record and deny the Conditional Use Permit previously approved. All members were asked to raise their hand if they wished to reconsider their previous decision and no members raised their hand. Members were then asked to raise their hand if they were in favor of not reconsidering their previous vote and all members raised their hand.

Question No. 3 - Tim Butler then asked the members if they wanted to substantively change their motion and if the answer is yes, then do the members want to make any substantive changes to the findings and/or do the members want to make any substantive changes to the conditions that were imposed previously? In response to this question, none of the members raised their hand. The members were then asked to raise their hand if they were not in favor of making any substantive changes to the previously approved findings or conditions in response to which all members raised their hand.

Tim Butler stated based on the answers to these questions he believes the Board needs to reaffirm the previously approved Conditional Use Permit and recommended that the Board reaffirm its prior action based on the findings in the April 2007 meeting, deleting the prior findings that referred to RLUPA, but subject to the conditions as made or stated in the motion of October 2004.

Tim Turney moved, as seconded by Mr. Prewitt, to reaffirm the previous motion of approval adopting the April 2007 finding with the approval being subject to the conditions as stated in the motion of October 2004. Motion carried 5-0.

Tim Turney moved to adjourn the meeting as seconded by David Prewitt. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m.

____________________________________

Sam Dozier III, Chairman