Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds building‑inspection finding: temporary office does not qualify as principal structure at Alexandria Drive site
Summary
The Board of Adjustment on May 20 upheld a Building Inspection determination that a mobile office/Connex and outdoor storage at 404 Alexandria Drive do not constitute a permitted principal structure, leaving outdoor storage impermissible without a compliant principal use and permits.
The Lexington‑Fayette Board of Adjustment on May 20 upheld a decision by the Division of Building Inspection that a temporary office and outdoor storage at 404 Alexandria Drive do not meet the code requirement for a principal structure.
Planning staff presented photographs and a site visit report showing a gravel drive, storage containers and outdoor equipment staged on the parcel, and said staff did not observe a mobile office meeting building‑code requirements. Lauren Stores of the Division of Building Inspections told the board that temporary structures may be permitted during construction but that a temporary unit used as a principal structure must meet Kentucky building‑code requirements, including plumbing and restroom facilities; the structure at the site did not. Building inspection staff said the property’s temporary office had not been permitted.
Applicant representatives, including Josh Kairns and Fred Lawson, said the site had evolving development plans and that a Connex storage container with power and internet was used occasionally as an office. They said they had been working through development‑plan approvals and FEMA issues and that the site had been used intermittently as a staging area. The applicant said they planned to pursue the full development plan and had spent money on site work.
Neighbors and other speakers raised concerns about outdoor storage, debris piles near Town Branch, floodplain impacts and the lack of required screening and fencing called for by the development plan. Planning staff said some of those enforcement matters would be handled by other divisions, but the narrow legal question before the board was whether the division of building inspection had correctly determined that no compliant principal structure existed.
After public comment and staff responses, a board member moved to uphold the building inspection decision on two grounds: the on‑site mobile office did not meet requirements of a permanent structure and accessory outdoor storage is not permitted without a principal structure on site; a second finding said a temporary structure that does not meet Kentucky building‑code requirements cannot be considered permanent. The motion passed.
