Board of Architectural Review

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Board of Architectural Review met on April 15, 2026. The meeting included one agenda item, one motion and vote, and no public comments were heard. The sole matter before the Board was a request concerning 265 South Ashland Avenue to construct a side Porte Cochere, which the Board approved. In total, one vote was taken during the session.

Attendance

The following members were present at the May 20, 2026 Board meeting:

• Ms. Hill
• Mr. Marquette
• Ms. Lindner

No members were absent or late.

Votes and Decisions

The Board took one formal vote during the May 20, 2026 meeting. 48:39

• Certificate of Appropriateness – 265 South Ashland Avenue: Ms. Hill moved to approve the certificate of appropriateness for 265 South Ashland Avenue, with Mr. Marquette providing the second. The motion passed on a voice vote of 2 ayes to 1 nay. Ms. Hill and Mr. Marquette voted in favor; Ms. Lindner voted against. Approval was granted subject to the following conditions: moving the portico chair toward the rear, simplifying details, and using option B with no pilasters.

Contested Items

• Portico Chair Design at 265 South Ashland Avenue: This item generated a split vote among Board members, with disagreement centered on the proposed design's impact on the historic building at that address. One member voted against the proposal, indicating concern over how the portico chair design would affect the historic character or integrity of the structure. The remaining members voted in favor, allowing the proposal to move forward. No additional details regarding the specific nature of the design objections or the identities of the members involved were provided in the meeting record.

265 South Ashland Avenue: Construct side Porte Cochere

36:30

The Board took up Agenda Item 5, a discussion regarding proposed construction of a side porte cochere at 265 South Ashland Avenue.

The discussion centered on design changes to the porte cochere, with key points including:

• Design simplification: The conversation focused on simplifying the overall design of the structure from what had previously been considered.
• Repositioning: The proposal involved moving the porte cochere to expose the side entrance of the property, a change that appeared to drive much of the design dialogue.

Key speakers in the discussion included Mr. Gibson, Ms. Hill, Ms. Lindner, and Mr. Marquette, who collectively examined the merits of the revised design approach.

The Board ultimately approved the item.