Board of Adjustment approves multiple short-term rentals, grants and denies variances; several items postponed to June

The Lexington City Board of Adjustment on May 12 approved a string of conditional-use permits for short-term rentals and voted on several variances and postponements after public testimony about setbacks, parking and neighborhood character.

Board business opened with procedural items and multiple requests to postpone hearings; the board moved two applications to the June 9 docket, including a daycare request and a residential project, after applicants and neighbors agreed to attempt neighborhood outreach.

The board approved a variance for David Tipton at 218 Chennault Road to reduce the side-yard setback from 8 feet to 1 foot 6 inches, subject to staff conditions. Tipton told the board he was rebuilding a garage after demolishing an earlier structure to repair a collapsed sewer lateral: “I’m simply building a garage,” he said during his presentation.

Neighbors opposed other variances. Barclay Hegerman, who said he lives behind the Tipton property, showed photographs to the board and objected to excavation and to what he described as encroachment near his lot line, saying the work already “extends under my property” and asking the board to deny the request. Planning staff responded that the accessory structure rules apply differently when an accessory structure projects in front of the principal structure and that the rear setback argument did not control in that case.

The board denied a variance for a front-yard paving request on Florence Avenue that would have allowed two driveways in the front yard; staff had recommended disapproval and several board members said alternatives such as rear parking should be pursued. The board also denied a variance by Carol Robertson for 410 Winfield Avenue because the applicant did not appear to rebut the staff report.

The board approved a variance allowing a lap pool in the side-street yard for property owner Cara Mead at 616 Autumn Lane. Planning staff had recommended disapproval; the applicant and her contractor argued that backyard grades, retaining walls and an underground electric line made moving the pool impracticable. The board approved…