Board of Architectural Review

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Board of Architectural Review held a meeting on July 17, 2024. The meeting addressed three main agenda items: Staff Approvals, Certificate of Appropriateness Applications, and Other Business, all of which were informational in nature. During the session, the board conducted eight motions and votes on various matters before them. The meeting included one public comment from a community member. The board's work focused on reviewing architectural and design matters within their jurisdiction, though specific details about the presiding officer, meeting time, and location were not specified in the available records.

Attendance

The following members were present at the meeting on July 17, 2024:

• George Bushing
• Vince Boat
• Cindy Boat
• Scott Book
• Jeff Fox
• Darren Taylor

No members were reported as absent or late for this meeting. All six members were in attendance.

Votes and Decisions

The meeting addressed eight Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) applications and one postponement through voice votes 0:00.

Postponements: • The application for 463 East Maxwell Street was postponed to August 21, 2024

Approved Applications: • 06510657-m: COA for 657 Elsmere Park was approved with two standard provisions • 16840438-l: COA for 438 West Second Street was approved with two standard conditions • 14820151: COA for 151 Penmoken Park was approved with conditions regarding porch foundation and columns • 00510119-f: COA for 119 Arcadia Park was approved with condition to provide final door and window details • 09300200-z: COA for 200 West High Street was approved with condition to create an extra island around sycamore tree • 00710124-j: COA for 124 South Ashland Avenue was approved with conditions regarding tree protection and site plans

Denied Applications: • 06900439-s: COA for 439 Fayette Park was disapproved

All votes were conducted by voice vote, with specific vote counts and individual member positions not recorded in the available data. The majority of applications received approval with various conditions attached to ensure compliance with historic preservation standards. Only one application, for 439 Fayette Park, was denied approval.

Public Comment

0:00 One member of the public addressed the meeting during the public comment period.

Kathy Chopra spoke regarding concerns about curbing and soil erosion affecting her property. Chopra's property is located adjacent to 439 Fayette Park, and she expressed concerns about how soil erosion and curbing issues are impacting her land. She addressed the potential effects these infrastructure matters are having on her property.

No other members of the public provided comments during this portion of the meeting.

Contested Items

The meeting featured one significant contested item that generated heated discussion among board members.

439 Fayette Park COA Disapproval

The board engaged in a heated discussion regarding a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application for 439 Fayette Park. The primary source of contention centered on work that had been completed at the property without obtaining prior approval from the board, as required for properties within the historic district.

Board members expressed concern that the completed work did not conform to the neighborhood's historic fabric and character. The unauthorized nature of the work appeared to be a significant factor in the board's deliberations, as property owners are required to seek approval before making alterations to historic properties.

Following the discussion, the board ultimately voted to disapprove the COA application. The disapproval was based on two key factors: the procedural violation of completing work without prior authorization, and the substantive issue that the work itself was deemed incompatible with the historic character of the surrounding neighborhood.

This decision reflects the board's commitment to maintaining the historic integrity of the district and enforcing the established review process that requires property owners to obtain approval before undertaking modifications to historic properties.

Staff Approvals

0:00 The board reviewed staff approvals for various properties in historic districts during this informational agenda item. The discussion covered renovations and tree removals that had been processed through the staff approval process.

The staff approvals encompassed multiple properties located within designated historic districts, with work ranging from building renovations to landscape modifications including tree removals. These approvals represent routine maintenance and improvement projects that fall within established guidelines and do not require full board review.

This agenda item served as an informational update to keep board members informed of ongoing preservation activities and staff decisions within their jurisdiction. No formal action was required from the board, as these matters had already been processed through the appropriate administrative channels.

The review of staff approvals provides transparency in the preservation process and ensures board members remain aware of preservation activities occurring throughout the historic districts under their oversight.

Certificate of Appropriateness Applications

0:00

The board reviewed multiple Certificate of Appropriateness applications during this agenda item, examining proposed changes to properties within the historic district. The discussion covered various types of projects including renovations, demolitions, and new construction proposals.

The applications presented required the board's evaluation to ensure compliance with historic preservation standards and district guidelines. Board members assessed each proposal's impact on the historic character of the affected properties and surrounding areas.

The review process involved examining architectural plans, materials specifications, and design elements to determine whether the proposed changes would be appropriate for properties within the historic district. The board considered factors such as historical significance, architectural integrity, and compatibility with existing structures.

This agenda item served an informational purpose, allowing the board to discuss the applications and review the details of each proposed project. The comprehensive review process ensures that any modifications to historic properties maintain the district's character while allowing for necessary improvements and updates.

The discussion provided an opportunity for board members to raise questions about specific applications and seek clarification on proposed changes. This thorough review process is essential for maintaining the historic integrity of the district while accommodating property owners' needs for renovations and improvements.

Other Business

0:00 The board addressed agenda item 3, Other Business, during which they conducted a review of previous meeting minutes. The discussion focused on two sets of minutes from earlier board meetings held this year.

The board examined the meeting minutes from May 15, 2024, and June 12, 2024. This review appears to have been conducted as part of the board's standard procedural requirements for maintaining accurate records of their proceedings.

No specific speakers were identified during this portion of the meeting, and the item was handled as an informational matter rather than requiring any formal action or decision from the board members. The review of these meeting minutes concluded without any noted concerns or amendments being raised.

This agenda item served as a routine administrative function, allowing the board to ensure their official records from the spring meetings were properly documented and reviewed according to their established procedures.