# Board of Architectural Review - September 18, 2024 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Board · September 18, 2024 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6225 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6225?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2024-09-18 - **Body**: Board - **Last revised**: March 29, 2026 - **Length**: 4,561 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 Architectural Review convened on September 18, 2024, to review three architectural applications for properties within the city's historic districts. The board conducted five votes during the session and heard no public comments from residents or stakeholders. The meeting addressed a range of exterior modification requests, including railing installations, solar panel placement, and landscaping changes. Of the three applications considered, the board approved one project, denied one, and tabled one for further review. The approved application involved solar panel installation on a rear roof at 128 East Third Street, while the board denied a request to install curbing in the front yard at 444 Fayette Park. The application for vinyl railing installation at 463 East Maxwell was tabled, indicating the need for additional information or discussion before a final decision could be made. The session demonstrates the board's ongoing role in balancing property owners' modification requests with historic preservation standards and community aesthetic guidelines. ## Votes and Decisions The Board took action on five items during the September 18, 2024 meeting, with four certificates of appropriateness approved and one postponement. **Postponement** The Board postponed the proceeding for 463 East Maxwell Street to October 16, 2024. The motion was approved by voice vote. **Approved Certificates of Appropriateness** The Board approved three certificates of appropriateness with conditions: • **Case number 18790128-K** for 128 East Third Street was approved by voice vote with specific conditions requiring that any increase in height be submitted to staff for review and approval prior to the start of work. Additionally, once reviewed by other city divisions, any changes must be resubmitted to staff for review and approval prior to the start of work or issuance of the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA). • **Case number 11660400-M** for 400 North Limestone Street was approved by voice vote with conditions requiring that once reviewed by other city divisions, any changes must be resubmitted to staff or board for review and approval prior to the start or issuance of the COA. Any changes that alter the submitted information must be resubmitted to staff for review and approval prior to the start of work. • **Case number 12200336-A** for 336 Madison Place was approved by voice vote with what were described as "standard two conditions." **Rejected Application** The Board rejected one certificate of appropriateness application: • **Case number 06900444-Z** for 444 Fayette Park was rejected by voice vote. The motion to reject the certificate of appropriateness failed to pass. All votes were conducted by voice vote, with no individual vote tallies recorded for any of the decisions. No transcript timestamps were available for these voting actions. ## Contested Items The Board addressed one contested application during the September 18, 2024 meeting that drew community opposition. **444 Fayette Park - Stone Edging Application** The primary point of contention involved an application to retain existing stone edging around the perimeter of the yard at 444 Fayette Park. The proposal faced opposition from community members who raised concerns about how the stone edging would impact the historic character of the district. The disagreement centered on whether the stone edging was appropriate for the historic setting and consistent with the area's preservation standards. Community members who opposed the application argued that retaining the stone edging would compromise the authentic historic appearance of the neighborhood. After considering the application and hearing from both the applicant and community members, the Board ultimately denied the request to retain the stone edging. The denial was based on the Board's determination that the stone edging raised legitimate concerns about maintaining the historic character of the district, aligning with the community opposition that was voiced during the proceedings. This decision reflects the Board's ongoing responsibility to balance property owners' requests with preservation of the district's historic integrity, particularly when community members raise substantive concerns about potential impacts on the neighborhood's character. ## Install vinyl railings at 463 East Maxwell The Board considered a request to install vinyl railings at 463 East Maxwell during their September 18, 2024 meeting. This agenda item was listed as Item 1 on the meeting agenda. The discussion regarding the vinyl railing installation was brief, with the Board ultimately deciding to postpone consideration of the matter. No detailed presentation or extensive debate was recorded for this item during the meeting. The Board voted to table the proceeding until October 16, 2024, allowing additional time for review or preparation of materials related to the vinyl railing installation request at the East Maxwell address. No specific concerns or technical details about the proposed railings were discussed during this meeting, as the item was moved to the next scheduled board meeting without substantive deliberation. ## Install solar panels on rear roof at 128 East Third Street The Board reviewed an application for the installation of solar panels on the rear roof of the property located at 128 East Third Street during their September 18, 2024 meeting. The agenda item was designated as Item 2 and involved a discussion regarding the proposed solar panel installation project. The application underwent Board review as part of the standard approval process for building modifications. Following their deliberation, the Board approved the solar panel installation application. However, the approval came with specific conditions that must be met by the applicant, though the exact nature of these conditions was not detailed in the available meeting materials. The approval allows the property owner to proceed with installing solar panels on the rear portion of the roof at 128 East Third Street, subject to compliance with the Board's specified requirements. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps, detailed discussion points, and the names of key speakers were not available in the provided meeting materials for this agenda item.* ## Install curbing in front yard at 444 Fayette Park The board reviewed a request to retain stone edging around the perimeter of the yard at 444 Fayette Park during their September 18, 2024 meeting. The application sought approval to install curbing in the front yard of the property. However, specific details about the proposed materials, dimensions, or design of the curbing were not provided in the available meeting documentation. Following their review and discussion of the request, the board voted to deny the application for installing curbing at 444 Fayette Park. The reasons for the denial were not detailed in the available meeting materials. **Outcome:** Application denied *Note: Transcript timestamps are not available for this agenda item.* --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — postponed (0-0): Postpone the proceeding for 463 East Maxwell Street to October 16, 2024 - **case number 18790128-K** — passed (0-0): Approve the certificate of appropriateness for 128 East Third Street with conditions - **case number 11660400-M** — passed (0-0): Approve the certificate of appropriateness for 400 North Limestone Street with conditions - **case number 12200336-A** — passed (0-0): Approve the certificate of appropriateness for 336 Madison Place with conditions - **case number 06900444-Z** — failed (0-0): Reject the certificate of appropriateness for 444 Fayette Park --- ## Full transcript You You Do Do Do So So So So So So So So So So So So I'd like to welcome you to the september 18 meeting of the board of architectural review We appreciate those of you who are in attendance today The board was established by zoning ordinance in 1958. Our first historic district was grant spark We now have a total of 15 historic districts The board which is appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the urban county council is a part of the division of historic preservation Historic preservation office maintains a full-time staff to assist you with your 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 first listed on our agenda In each case, we'll have a presentation by the staff and we'll hear any comments from the applicant The board will then ask questions and make comments regarding the application and then hear comments from any other interested parties The chair will then ask the board members to enter in motion If you wish to address the board, please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the public record We also ask that you write your name on the sign-in sheet by the door so that information can be recorded correctly I would like to note the following staff approvals before we begin a review of the applications There are certain items that the staff can approve eliminating the necessity for all applicants to appear before the board there are a total of 28 Approved applicants noted on today's agenda. They are as follows In the ashland avenue historic district at 316 de shea road replace walkway At 10 12 through 10 14 fincastle road renovate the structure in the elstra avenue historic district at 152 old park Renovate the site At 608 615 622 636 646 and 656 High street replace the gas line service at 456 east maxwell street repair chimneys In the bellcourt historic district at 602 sayer avenue renovate structure In the constitution historic district at 128 east 3rd street renovate structure In the fayette park historic district at 425 fayette park renovate front door In the north side historic district at 507 north broadway renovate structure At 441 west second street prep for painting 449 west second street prepare for painting and at 445 West 3rd street remove dying tree In the pensacola historic district at 164 pin moken Uh refurbish the windows At 211 arcadia park remove deteriorated tree at 116 barbary lane replace the deteriorated tree at 146 Shawnee place remove and replace dying trees and at 150 shawnee place renovate structure in sight In the south ashland central avenue historic district at 225 706 601 and 336 Let's start that over again at 225 south ashland avenue renovate structure at 706 central park Avenue renovate structure at 601 west short renovate structure and 336 madison place renovate the structure at two in the St paul am am each church historic district at 251 north upper street refurbish the door and bell tower And the woodward heights historic district at 320 merino street Reissue the coa We will now turn to the applications that are pending before us I will note I want to do a couple changes to the agenda I'm anticipating for for fayette park will be contested And so I'd like to hold that To the last and let me do the other routine cases first turning first now to 463 east maxwell street Uh, the scope of work is installed vinyl railings. It's my understanding that there has been a request made to continue that proceeding Barry this is the uh Maxwell, sorry, I cannot hear it's my understanding that there's been a request to postpone this one. Uh, yes, sir. All right, so Do I do I have a motion that we postpone this proceeding to october 16? All right, if I could jump in for a second The deadline for action on that one is september 8th. We have we have a waiver and it's been signed Okay, I just signed the waiver now. I will like to note for the record This case has been postponed several times In my opinion, this should be the last postponement. Do you all agree with that? Agree, okay So do I have a motion to postpone to october 16 so moved. All right, do I have a second second? Without objection, uh, this proceeding is can postpone to october 16, uh, 2024 Let's turn now to 128 east 3rd street Civil work is installed solar panels on rear roof Is the applicant here? The applicant is not present but has received her staff report and is agreeable with the findings. He does agree with the findings. Yes All right, then, uh scope of work as I said is installed solar panels on the roof uh There are it's been recommended for approval with the so-called standard two conditions No one other Let me if I could jump in on that too as well. Um After looking at this issue After the last meeting, I think it would be legally cleaner If the applicant isn't here for us to go ahead and hear a presentation from staff Except we only do presentations when they want to have a hearing and contest it It's my understanding. I don't know why they would want to contest this one Okay, I just wanted to draw that to your attention Okay Uh Well, let me get one note of clarification these are not just the standard two There is the notation of any increase in heighth. Did you discuss that with them? Correct, and that's a standard on any solar panels. We have to make sure it's not Larger than the typical six inches. Okay council, we typically move forward with basically A pro forma standards that always are always attached So to that end, let me read them into the record Any increase in heighth should be submitted to staff for review and approval prior to the start of work The second one is once reviewed by the other city divisions Resubmitting changes to staff or review for review Review and approval prior to the start of an issuance of coa And finally number three if any changes are made that alter the information submitted Resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to the start of work Do I have any questions or comments from the board members about this application? Any questions or comments from the audience? If not, the chair is ready for a motion To approve the application Chair in regards to case number one eight seven nine zero one two eight dash k I move that we approve the certificate of appropriateness With the conditions that you just read into the record. All right. Do I have a second second? Chair will call the motion all those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye Opposed nay the motion passes and the application as conditioned is approved Returning now to our next application at 400 north limestone street In the mulberry hill historic district scuttle work is install a wall sign Uh is the applicant here Come on up Hi, good afternoon State your name for the record, please All right Staff has recommended approval of your application subject to what we've been referring as standard conditions Let me just read read them to you in the record Uh, the first condition is once reviewed by the other city divisions Resubmitting changes the staff or board for review and approval prior to the start or issuance of the coa or any agreement Yeah, the sound system here is horrible once reviewed by the other city divisions Resubmitting and change the staff or board for review and approval prior to the start of the issuance of the cla Are you in agreement? Do you mean it's in it's in your packet is it not Give me this one. Yeah, just read it just read the recommendation on the back page Yeah, are we in agreement with that Yeah, okay, right all right, then the second one is And number two, I got approved already for uh Working on outside All right And I got approved for uh, the business to be there right you have to get the sign signage and this is the first step Okay. All right Question is resolved The second one is any changes are made that alter the information submitted This is assuming that's gone to the city division that they asked to do change which is not going to happen Okay Resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to the start of work. Are we in agreement with that condition? uh You mean I need to submit Different thing right for the sign right to building inspection. Okay So here is the first step that i'm gonna do to get approved. Then I can I get the yes second. Okay. Okay Okay All right. Do I have any questions or comments about this application? It's pretty straightforward sir, and you're not gonna have any problems. I thought it's the approval. It's gonna I understand These are just in the in the event and it's not going to happen. But we we need to cover our basis just to make sure All right. Do I have a motion to approve this? applicant Any questions or questions or comments from the audience? If not, then i'm ready for a motion chair with regard to case number One one six six zero four zero zero dash m at 400 north limestone street I move that the certificate of appropriateness be granted with the two standard conditions. All right. Do I have a second second? Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none the chair will call the question all those in favor of the motion, please say aye Aye, aye opposed nay. The motion as conditioned is approved. Thank you so much Thank you. All right. Thank you, sir All right turning to 336 madison place In the woodward heights historic district scope of work is demolished shed Deadline for board action is october 29 2024 The applicant is coming to the podium State your name for the record, please. Shane eckman. Mr. Eckman staff has recommended approval of your application Subject to the standard two conditions, which i've read in previously. Are you in agreement with those? Yes. Thank you uh, any questions or comments from the board members Any questions or comments from the audience? All right. I'm ready for a motion Chair in regards to case number one two two zero zero three three six dash a I move that we approve the Certificate of appropriateness with the standard two conditions. All right. Do I have a second second any discussion on the motion? Hearing none. The chair will call the question all those in favor say aye Aye opposed nay motion passes and the cla as conditions approved. Thank you so much for your time and good luck with your project All right turning now To our our next application At 444 Fayette park in the Fayette park historic district Scope of work is retaining some stone edging around the perimeter of the yard applicant here All right, if you'll state your name for the record and bring that microphone down to you This sound system is wonky. Thank you. Uh, i'm kathy chopra And I have the residence of 444 Fayette park. All right, miss chopra Staff has recommended a denial of your application. I assume that you would like to be heard on this And you're requesting a hearing. Um, i'd like to talk about yeah Requesting a hearing I can hear you better now. Okay uh, what we do is our procedure is the staff will read their findings and Tell us about the case And then they'll recommend make their formal recommendation Then you can be heard And then we'll take it under consideration. All right. Thank you. Thank you Why am I having so much trouble hearing So this is uh 444 Fayette park And the scope of work is Retain the stone edging around the perimeter of the yard on inspection staff found both 444 Fayette park and 439 Fayette park have installed Stone edging in the front yard. The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness To retain the stone edging around the perimeter of the front yard This work has been completed without a coa permit Staff would note that the applicant has made an application to install a retaining wall in the front yard twice both disapproved by the boar uh, the first was july 12th, 2006 The second was june 21 2023 439 Fayette park went before the board in july. The case was disapproved but it has been Submitted for appeal and is pending with the planning commission Guidelines are In your uh packet for your use, um, I was just wondering do you have a better picture of the retaining wall than that? Yes, we yeah, let's go through the let's go through the other photographs if you don't mind So this is both You can see 439 and 444 in this photo. All right. They have the same stone edging And this one's a little blurry but close up of that, all right This is a close-up at the front entry steps And this is the same Uh edging at 439, okay, which was disapproved So they do match Yes, sir. All right Um, then this is uh, just a general photo of Fayette park showing the typical conditions uh for the front yards Um For the findings staff finds the proposal for the introduction of new elements into the Fayette park historic district That does not have elements such as edge Associated with a pattern of development does not meet the guidelines guideline three states Site and setting in addition to buildings elements of Surrounding site and setting contribute to the character of the historic district These elements include both natural and man-made features such as trees fields fences gardens driveways retaining walls and boundary definers Historic site elements help to define a property's historic character And appearance historic site and setting features should be preserved and maintained guideline 3 6 a and 3 6 b state respectively Land features land formations that are significant should be preserved and maintained And that are altered or introduced Should be compatible to the site and surrounding properties Guideline 3 6 f states vistas and approaches should be preserved and maintained In Fayette Park the front yards are rolled from the finished grade Down to the level of the street or sidewalk drives and other surfaces introduction of new boundary defining elements such as the edging are not part of the fabric of Fayette Park There are elements that change the historic features in Fayette Park and should not be introduced into the historic district staff recommends denial of the Retaining of retaining the stone edging Okay, any questions from the board members Miss Cobra And by preamble I'll simply point out we had if you were present for the fairly extensive conversation We had last month about your neighbor. So we're familiar with the project. So All right. Go ahead first I have to say The hardest part about Fayette Park being as old as it is is we don't know even the historical does not have pictures Dating back to the turn of the century what Fayette Park looked like my house is the last house built in Fayette Park Which is 1908. Okay, and that being said it is really hard to sit here and say You know, this is not the integrity of Fayette Park when we don't know or have evidence to say yes or no either way but I I'm gonna keep pursuing that one way or another But I will start first with I did meet with an arborist because one of the other issues with my particular Front yard and one side of Fayette Park is a different grade than the opposite side mine sitting in the one corner We do have a problem with erosion no matter what I do and I you know I think originally I was new to Lexington. I just bought my house on 2006 when we were Spending 18 months working on the house. We had a very ambitious plan for the front at this time We've not lived in the house at all So we had no idea what we were up against about drainage or anything else now 17 years later or so We're more aware of some of the problems that being said I got with Dave Leonard and arborist one of the problems in the one corner if you can pull up one of the pictures again, please and And more focus on the sycamore that's to the right You see in this picture the Sycamore to the right it is a shared. It's a shared tree. It sits exactly on the property line so hence myself and my neighbor are both responsible for the care and Pruning or anything else we get done with this tree Oh, yeah, that's a better view. Thank you very much. So I got with Dave Leonard In July and he came out in August he Assessed the health of the tree. He measured the tree which is by the way 50 inches around and He made more comments and recommendations about that particular tree that being said he sent me His recommendations he says I was contacted by mrs Chopra to evaluate the large sycamore on the border of 444 and 439 Fayette Park on July 22nd 2024 and the follow-up. There's a tree inspection was actually done on August 8th 2024 the trees in American sycamore roughly around 50 inches in diameter in very good health The tree is large enough to predate the houses on Fayette Park it has been irrigated for the last 17 years We were they were experiencing erosion on the south side of the tree. Where is there is a deep slope and it slopes Toward the sidewalk meaning we get a lot of washout to get a lot of washout in the front part of the grass All of the front part where the tree is as well And I believe my neighbor next door gets washed out as well since we our property is so close And he says they've experienced erosion or the south side of the tree where it's Where there is a steep slope the limestone curbing was installed to prevent further erosion and soil backfill Soil was backfilled to cover the exposed roots new grass has been established and the project looks good soil no longer is On The sidewalk due to the curbing and the established sod the soil is being retained around the tree and no erosion has occurred at this Time the goals were met and this project was successful if you have any questions Contact Dave for more about all right. Do you have copies of that letter for us? Yes? I do as a matter of fact Okay, all right Do I give it to you? I just introduced it into the record Thank you So other than that like I says we have been fighting this project for so many years, but Regardless, thank you very much for hearing me out. All right. You're welcome any questions or comments from the board members Go ahead Just a moment. Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry Absolutely, and I gave you the original where Dave signed it all so for you all right Although that's the best evidence for you in our record But we'll keep a copy of it and give you back the original and I have the I have a copy. I'm okay Okay. All right. Thank you. So much miss Marquette so my understanding that the erosion issue is Focused on the tree and the the ground surrounding the tree that is correct It started there and it morphed into if we were correcting Dealing with the erosion problem at the tree. We also at the same time dealt with the erosion of the yard itself Normally when it rains all that front corner it's almost like the L shape you will end up getting nothing but dirt as people frequently walk Fayette Park and Walk through all of this soil and the erosion every year. I have to reseed or lay grass down every single year There's just no help for it. This has really Helped tremendously and again, we backfilled the tree because it's gotten worse over the years It's just it's just the drainage the more we work on this and my neighbor did He didn't reroute his drainage and it now goes toward my backyard Instead of the front of the house between the properties that helped tremendously as well All right Are your downspouts Tubed Away from the house. Oh my gosh. It's more his house. It's not my house. That's the problem Okay, the way if you look at my house My downspouts are all down like the bigger ones are on the side of the house and they are they're big to accommodate all the water that comes off my house and They more go toward the back of the yard toward Willie Street if I have to explain how the water flows from my house and I understanding from what I believe Barry said that Twice you've applied for a retaining wall. Mm-hmm And twice it's been denied Correct. Okay, like that. I think the first one was a little bit too ambitious. It was more not in And tone with it. It was it was big We obviously have heard this, you know from your neighbor and we've talked about this extensively I Really care about saving the tree. And so the cool tree. I don't want anything I say to mean that that's not what I care about Absolutely but I think that I do think that The retained the retaining that you put everywhere is not in keeping with the neighborhood and I do feel sorry for your problem I do under I Understand that it's an issue, but that to me is kind of a different thing from the guidelines I really would Like the opportunity to really find a solution that helps the tree without Putting curbing everywhere around your yard and along that area. And so for that reason I am gonna Make a motion to reject or one of to vote to reject the certificate of appropriateness but I I do hope that you Come with a solution that just addresses that tree because I do want to make sure we save the tree It's dip it's a difficult issue that we've just been fighting with for a lot of years anything else I'm just going to second what Sarah has said the I understand the the issue of trying to make sure you're protecting the tree and the aggravation of the constant erosion there are other Avenues other than the retaining wall that I think you can explore That would help you Stabilize that slope My concern is the more I look at that picture the way that retaining wall just sticks out relative to your other neighbors to address your other question or point we incorporated all the historic features of the neighborhood at the time that the War was approved or the historic overlay was approved. So we're not Really at liberty to go back and try to figure out what was it like before the H1 overlay was approved. You're so everything is grandfathered in as is The h1 overlay was conditioned with the rolling slope yards with no retaining walls There is as we have discussed before Given the fact that you're a compact area It's Important to maintain that visual symmetry of your entire street. And for that reason, I really can't see my way to Rejecting the staff's recommendation of disapproval So I understand I appreciate your time. I know that this has been an aggravation You of course have the right to take an appeal from here and I suspect that you will Or not. I don't know but at the same time This the guidelines are pretty clear on this one So Kathy, thank you so much for your your your time and your patience Thank you for hearing me out and you know taking this in good In good graces. It's appreciated. All right. Thank you Any further questions or comments about this one and there's absolutely nobody left in the audience All right, so I think we're ready for a motion Chair in regards to case number 0 6 9 0 0 4 4 4 dash Z. I move that we Give the address, please. Oh, so 444 Fayette Park. I move that we reject the certificate of appropriateness As per the recommendation of the staff All right. Do I have a second second any discussion on the motion? Hearing none the chair will call the motion all those in favor of the motion to accept the staff recommendation of disapproval Say aye. Aye Opposed nay. All right. The COA is disapproved. Thank you so much All right, we have a couple of business items to discuss The approval of the minutes for July 17 and August 21 I I went through them and I made a couple of minor changes that I've suggested to Amelia. I Like this format, by the way, if we can keep it, this is a lot better It's We are getting assistance from a staff member of the Commissioner's office Understand and I'm glad that person for that. I hope that can continue It is the intent for it to continue and it's just been a tremendous assistance to the HP staff Well, if my praise and and compliments can help This was this the best set of minutes. I've seen the quite sometime well, and we've been working with the person who is taking it on and So it's evolved into the point. We're at now and I'm delighted. Okay, please We too are very pleased. All right. Thank you very much Well, we'll approve them individually do I have a motion to approve to July 17 2024 minutes So moved you have a second second without objection. They stand approved. Do I have a motion to approve the August 21? 2024 minutes so moved. Do I have a second second without objection those minutes stand approved subject to the minor changes All right. I don't think we have any other business So I have a motion to adjourn. So move. Do I have a second second? We stand adjourned till October whenever 16 thank you very much I