# Board of Architectural Review - April 9, 2008 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Board · April 9, 2008 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/458 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/458?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2008-04-09 - **Body**: Board - **Last revised**: February 2, 2026 - **Length**: 2,726 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Board of Architects for Review convened on April 9, 2008, at 101 East Vine Street, Room 220, with Clyde Carpenter presiding as the meeting officer. The board reviewed seven agenda items during the session, addressing various architectural and construction proposals throughout the community. The meeting resulted in six motions and votes being taken, with no public comments recorded during the proceedings. Five projects received approval from the board, including fence installations on West 6th Street and modifications to properties on East Main Street and Hampton Court, while one item was tabled for future consideration and another was withdrawn by the applicant. ## Attendance The following Board members were present at the April 9, 2008 meeting: • Derek Wingfield • Jim Dickinson • Clyde Carpenter No Board members were reported as absent or late for this meeting. ## Votes and Decisions The Board conducted six votes during the April 9, 2008 meeting, all by voice vote with unanimous approval except for one item that was tabled. **Certificate of Appropriateness Approvals:** [timestamp: 15:00] The Board approved the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for **407-409 West 6th Street** subject to five conditions listed in the staff report. The motion passed by voice vote. [timestamp: 20:00] The COA for **411 West 6th Street** was approved subject to four conditions listed in the staff report. The motion passed by voice vote. [timestamp: 25:00] The Board approved the COA for **413 West 6th Street** subject to four conditions listed in the staff report. The motion passed by voice vote. [timestamp: 30:00] The certificate of appropriateness application for **611 East Main Street** was approved without additional conditions. The motion passed by voice vote. [timestamp: 35:00] The COA for **316 Hampton Court** was approved subject to three conditions listed in the staff report. The motion passed by voice vote. **Tabled Item:** [timestamp: 45:00] The Board voted to table the portion of the Certificate of Appropriateness application for **127 Woodland Avenue** regarding the change in siding material to the main structure. The remainder of the application was approved subject to three conditions listed in the staff report. This motion passed by voice vote. All votes were conducted as voice votes with no recorded individual member positions. The specific members making motions and providing seconds were not identified in the available records. The conditions referenced in each approval were detailed in the corresponding staff reports presented to the Board. ## 407-409 West 6th Street, install a fence [timestamp: 15:00] The Board reviewed an application to install a fence at 407-409 West 6th Street. Ron Meese, representing the applicant, presented the proposal to the Board. Staff had previously reviewed the fence installation request and provided a recommendation with specific conditions regarding the fence's height and spacing requirements. During the discussion, Meese indicated his agreement with the staff's recommended conditions for the project. The Board approved the fence installation application, accepting the staff recommendation with the specified conditions for height and spacing that had been outlined in the review process. ## 411 West 6th Street, install a fence [timestamp: 20:00] The Board reviewed agenda item 2 regarding a fence installation at 411 West 6th Street. The applicant, Carl, presented the proposal to the Board for consideration. Staff had previously reviewed the application and developed a recommendation that included four specific conditions for the fence installation. During the discussion, Carl indicated his agreement with the staff's recommendation and the accompanying conditions. The Board approved the fence installation application with the four conditions as recommended by staff. Carl's acceptance of these conditions facilitated the approval process for this agenda item. ## 413 West 6th Street, install a fence [timestamp: 25:00] The Board reviewed agenda item 3, an application to install a fence at 413 West 6th Street. The applicant, Carl, presented the proposal to the Board for consideration. Staff had prepared a recommendation regarding the fence installation that included four specific conditions. During the discussion, Carl indicated his agreement with the staff's recommendation and the accompanying conditions that would govern the fence installation. The Board approved the fence installation application at 413 West 6th Street, with the applicant accepting the four conditions outlined in the staff recommendation. ## 611 East Main Street, paint the masonry garage [timestamp: 30:00] The Board reviewed agenda item 4 regarding a proposal to paint the masonry garage at 611 East Main Street. The discussion centered on staff's recommendation to paint the front portion of the garage structure. The primary consideration was the practical difficulty involved in removing existing paint from the masonry surface. Staff had determined that paint removal would be challenging and potentially damaging to the underlying masonry. The applicant was present and expressed agreement with the staff's recommendation to proceed with painting rather than attempting paint removal. No significant concerns or objections were raised during the discussion. The Board approved the proposal to paint the masonry garage front as recommended by staff. ## 316 Hampton Court, change an opening and construct a balcony [timestamp: 35:00] The Board reviewed an application for 316 Hampton Court to change an opening and construct a balcony. Terry Kelly, the applicant, presented the proposal to the Board. Staff had prepared a recommendation to approve the project with three specific conditions attached. During the discussion, Terry Kelly indicated his agreement with the staff's recommendation and the proposed conditions for approval. The Board proceeded to approve the application for the balcony construction and opening modification at 316 Hampton Court, incorporating the three conditions as recommended by staff. No significant concerns or objections were raised during the review process. The approval allows the applicant to move forward with the proposed changes to the property, subject to compliance with the specified conditions outlined in the staff recommendation. ## 127 Woodland Avenue, replace the garage and change the siding of the main struct [timestamp: 45:00] The Board reviewed agenda item 6, an application for 127 Woodland Avenue involving two proposed changes: replacing the existing garage and changing the siding of the main structure. Lynn Petticoat, the applicant, presented the proposal to the Board. During the discussion, concerns were raised regarding the siding change portion of the application. Following the Board's feedback, Petticoat agreed to modify the scope of the current application. The applicant chose to table the siding change component and proceed only with the garage replacement portion of the project. The outcome was that the siding change was tabled, allowing the garage replacement to move forward separately. This approach enabled the applicant to address the garage work while providing additional time to refine plans for the siding modifications on the main structure. ## 460 East Maxwell Street [timestamp: 50:00] Agenda item 7 regarding 460 East Maxwell Street was withdrawn from consideration at the April 9, 2008 Board meeting. No discussion took place and no action was required on this item. The withdrawal meant that whatever matter was originally scheduled to be addressed concerning this property was removed from the meeting agenda before any presentation or deliberation occurred. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval and issuance of the COA for 407-409 West 6th Street - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of the COA for 411 West 6th Street - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of the COA for 413 West 6th Street - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of the certificate of appropriateness application for 611 East Main Street - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of the COA for 316 Hampton Court - **Motion** — tabled (0-0): Table the portion of the Certificate of Appropriate Application regarding the change in the siding material to the main structure and approve the remainder of the application for 127 Woodland Avenue --- ## Full transcript I'd like to welcome you to the April 9, 2008, public hearing of the Board of Architects for Review. We appreciate everyone who is here this afternoon. The board was established by a zoning ordinance in 1958. Our first historic district was Gratz Park. We now have a total of 14 historic districts. The board, which is appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the Urban County Council, is part of the Division of Historic Preservation. This afternoon, we have three members of the Board of Architects for Review who are with us, and I'll ask them to introduce themselves. Derek Wingfield. Hi, Jim Dickinson. I'm Clyde Carpenter. I'm currently the chair of the board. We also have members of the Office of Historic Preservation staff who are here this afternoon, and some of them will be taking part in the meeting as we progress through the hearing. The Office of Historic Preservation maintains a full-time staff to assist applicants with their projects. The board encourages and recommends that applicants use them as a resource. The Historic Preservation Office is located at 101 East Vine Street, Room 220. It is our procedure to consider applications in the order in which they are listed on our agenda. In each case, we will have a presentation by the staff and will hear any additional comments from the applicant. The board will then ask questions or make comments regarding the application, and then we will hear comments from any interested parties in the audience. The chair will then ask the board members to enter a motion. If you are here this afternoon and you want to speak to the board or if you're an applicant, we would like to ask you to come down front and speak into the microphone. We would also like to ask you to write your name and address on the sign-in sheet, which is back near the entrance door, so that we can get the information correctly recorded in our records. This afternoon we have five staff approvals, which I would like to note. There are certain items that the staff can approve, and applicants who have projects in which the staff can grant approval do not have to appear before the full board. So we have five approvals and I will read them into the record. There are three staff approvals in the Aylesford Historic District today. One, 552 East High Street, repair and replace shingles and reline box gutters. Two, 538 East High Street, repair and replace sidewalks. And three, 320 Linden Walk, repair and replace fences. In South Hill Historic District, one approval, 380 South Mill Street, tuck point, repoint and repaint building. In the Western Suburb Historic District, one approval, 632 West Shore Street, replace a tree. We will now proceed with the review of applications for a Certificate of Appropriateness. There are some items on our agenda this afternoon in which the staff has recommended approval as submitted or approval with a few conditions. And if the applicants who are here agree with the findings of the staff and the recommendation, we can take action on these cases without having a full hearing. So I am going to sound the agenda and see where we are with some of these applications. So the first item on the agenda, item number one in the Northside Historic District, 407-409 West 6th Street, install a fence in front of Porch Ballast Raids. Is the applicant for that? Yes, I'm sorry. Randy, I guess it worked just in time. My name is Ron Meese and I agree with what they have listed on that. I read over it and I agree. Could you give us your address please? It's 407-409 West 6th Street. So you agree with the staff. Okay. The staff recommended approval with some conditions as noted in the report about the height of the fence and the spacing and so forth. Yes, sir. And they also would like for you to bring back some information to them so you can work with the staff on this. Okay. Okay. All right. Well, thank you very much. Thank you. Appreciate it. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to make comments about this application? Okay. Hearing no comments, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval and issuance of the COA for 407-409 West 6th Street subject to the five conditions listed in the staff report. And I'll second the motion. I'm under the impression there are other types of fences on the street that we're not adding in. Fences for the first time, just ornamental fences? Okay. I'm seeing Amelia's head nodding in affirmative. Okay. And I'll second the motion. Okay. Any more discussion? Okay. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Okay. Motion carried. Okay. The next item on the agenda, also in the Northside Historic District, also on West 6th Street, 411 West 6th Street, is also to install a fence. Is that applicant present? If you'll give us your name and address. Carl, 11663 Ellesmere Park. Have you had a chance to read the... Yeah, that's fine. I agree with you. You agree? Yeah. It's approval with four different items. Okay. Right. Very fine. Okay. Well, thank you. Is anyone in the audience who would like to make comments about this application? Okay. Hearing no comments, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of the COA for 411 West 6th Street, subject to the four conditions listed in the staff report. I second. All right. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion carried. Okay. Item number three on the agenda, also on the Northside, also on West 6th Street, 413 West 6th Street. That's to install a fence. And would you give us your name again, please? Carl, 11663 Ellesmere Park. And I read it and agree. Okay. You agree also. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Once again, is there anyone in the audience who would like to make comments about this application? Okay. Hearing no comments, the chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of the issues of the COA for 413 West 6th Street, subject to the four conditions listed in the staff report. Second. Okay. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion carried. Okay. All right. The next item on the agenda is in Belcourt. It's item number four on our agenda, 611 East Main Street, paint the masonry garage. Is that applicant present? The applicant is not present, but he has called and read the application we talked today, and he has agreed with the findings. Yeah. I mean, basically, you are recommending approval because of the difficulty in removing the paint, of leaving the paint on the front of the garage, but not painting the other surfaces. That's correct. He's in agreement with that? He is. I did have one question about that. How do you all feel about the fact that the front would be painted and the rest of the garage would not be? I think the issue is the fact that there's a tightness on both sides. It backs up to a property line. It also backs up to another person's garage that is very tight to get in to paint the garage. And then also because there's not a huge amount of air space, there's not a lot of breathing room for this building, to have a breathability for that brick and for the vapor barrier to actually be able to breathe correctly. And so the other two surfaces face areas that are not necessarily going to be treated the same way, have the same kind of weather increments as the others. And again, it is one of those things that with painted surfaces, we don't necessarily always recommend the painted surfaces, you know, the building to be painted. And so I think the reasoning for that is actually just for the care for the building, you know, and the fact that it has less air flow on those sides. Okay. Do you all have any questions? I don't have any questions. I think, Amelia, you may have left out a word or two or your third paragraph. I'm sure I have. Thank you so much. Sorry. Well, it's our official finding. It's why I'm only saying something. I can fix this after the meeting, if you like. But it's, I'm assuming that what you're trying to say is, typically, we do not recommend painting unpainted buildings because our buildings of this type usually were not painted correctly. Correct? That's correct. And also, typically, we don't want brick that's never been painted to be painted. That's correct. In this case, although it should have been painted, it would do so much damage to take it off that it would be detrimental to the structure. It would be very difficult. And they tried test patches, and flakes of brick were coming off. And so that would further deteriorate these two surfaces and walls. Okay. Well, the staff has recommended approval as submitted. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to make any comments about this application? Okay. Hearing none, the Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move we accept the staff's findings and recommendation to approve the certificate of appropriateness application for 611 East Main Street. Is there a second? Second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion carried. All right. The next item on our agenda, item number five, the Northside Historic District 316 Hampton Court. The application is to change an opening and to construct a balcony. Is the applicant present? If you'll be kind enough to give us your name and address, please. Terry Kelly. I live at 435 West 3rd Street. The staff has recommended approval with three conditions in the report. Have you had a chance to read those over? I have, and we agree with them. Okay. Very good. Thank you. I do have a single question. Okay. This is for the third floor of the building. If the same issue should come up for the second floor, could that be treated as a staff approval if this one gets approved? I'll have to ask. It's not likely, but just if it is. No, each individual balcony that needs to be treated separately because it is a built form. Although it's not a huge thing, I think it's sufficient magnitude, changing the appearance of the building, that you probably have to come back to us. But there would be the third floor balcony, and so that might be a precedent that we'd be following. But we'd have to look at it. Okay. I'll bring it up if I have to. Okay. Very good. Anyone in the audience care to comment on this application? Hearing none, the staff has recommended approval with three conditions in the report. The chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of the COA for 316 Hampton Court, subject to the three conditions listed in the staff report. I'll second the motion. Any discussion? Okay. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Aye. Okay. Aye. Motion carried. Okay. Thank you. The next item on the agenda, item number six in Aylesford Historic District, 127 Woodland Avenue. The application is to replace the garage and change the siding of the main structure. Is the applicant here for this? Give us your name and address, please. Lynn Petticoat, 347 South Upper. The staff has recommended approval of part of the application and tabling the rest of it. Do you want to talk to us about this? Do you want to hear the case? I don't think there's any need to hear the case. We do have to do additional studying to see what's underneath the existing stuff that's on the house. So you agree with all the other findings, including perhaps doing something different than the fabricalized panels on the roof? Yes. Okay. All right. Okay. And then you'll come back to us when you want to consider the hardy plank and the stucco issue again. Okay. I'm willing to work with staff on any of the suggestions, especially about the slab and relationship to the driveway that's existing. Okay. We'll find it. Anyone in the audience care to comment on this application? Okay. Well, the staff has made some recommendations, which you can see in the report, and they basically recommended approval of the garage with some conditions and then tabling the portion of the application dealing with changing material on the exterior of the house. Is there a motion? Mr. Chair, I move that we table the portion of the Certificate of Appropriate Application regarding the change in the siding material to the main structure and approve the remainder of the application subject to the three conditions listed in the staff report. Do we need a date to which that's being postponed? Table, yeah. Ms. Pettigo, when do you think you could come back? Our next meeting this month is April the 23rd, and then we have meetings in May, I think May the 14th, I believe, and May the 28th, I think, yeah. So do you have a date when you think you could come back? I would say that we'd be ready by April 23rd. April 23rd. That's two weeks from now. And, of course, you have to get the stuff back to the staff, I think. It would be about a week turnaround, I think. So do you think you can do that? We've already contacted to try to get people over there to see. Okay, fine. Thank you. So we would be postponing it until the 23rd? We'll add that to my motion. All right. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying. I hadn't gotten to the second yet. Oh, you haven't. I was interrupted. And, unfortunately, I think it just needs to be noted, since it's the finding that's justifying the recommendation that the existing structure be demolished, that I think we need to fix a sentence, and it's the first sentence it should read. Martin, is this yours? Yes. All right. Martin, I'm going to read to you the, on page 17, I think what happened was you made us what was an introductory adverbial clause into a sentence. It should read, and if you disagree with me, tell me, it should read as follows. Although the existing 18 by 18 foot pyramidal roofed board and molded batten outbuilding having, insert the word a driveway of four 16 inch wide concrete strips as a glimpse of the past, comma, layers of the gravel within the structure cover what was once the sole plate, period. You see what you've done? You've made it into a sentence. OK. OK. And what is a sole plate? S-O-L-E. The sole plate was covered. An additional correction needs to occur in the last sentence of that paragraph. It should read, the overall deterioration of the structure, comma, coupled with today's, I'm sorry, this is one other change. Second sentence, the bottom edge of the entire structure has dry, I assume you mean to add rot, and the walls are bowed. Is that correct? That's correct. All right. Third sentence is fine. Next sentence, the overall deterioration of the structure coupled with today's desired use makes the renovation of the existing garage, including the adjacent deteriorated toolshed, comma, impractical. OK. All right. Demolition of this building, outbuilding is within the guidelines, period. With those corrections, I'll second the motion. OK. Any discussion? OK. OK. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion carried. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Let's see. The next item on our agenda, 460 East Maxwell Street. It's also an Aylesford. That has been withdrawn. And I don't believe we need to take any action on that. Is there any other business? OK. And the chair will entertain a motion to adjourn. Does the chair move for adjournment? Second. OK. All in favor? Aye. Aye. OK. Thank you. OK.