[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6606639,"mediaKeyId","2963930-3e8f11996f0e60cdf3c718972413bf4a","parentId",2963930,"title","Baltimore County LPC orders driveway restoration, denies multiple unpermitted alterations at Rodney House property","audioSeconds",861,"startMs",2595000,"endMs",3456000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2963930-3e8f11996f0e60cdf3c718972413bf4a&start=2595&end=3456","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2963930-3e8f11996f0e60cdf3c718972413bf4a/thumbnail_2595000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6606639/Baltimore-County/Maryland/Baltimore-County-LPC-orders-driveway-restoration-denies-multiple-unpermitted-alterations-at-Rodney-House-property","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6606639-a589cab0c609a334e858a81954b41cca/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146871&Signature=dH6ysH~ebNvAbu0yZbWxBB9eDhr53IumuU-NOa4NA-dStokRafOdZWWNn3sAZTxUSoMbb1AmnZdvY3tQy03Asja2IClR5xQYFSP7jZCCRBmyEpQ9vaw~-3TdUls0fQHrWbhQBbCpxFZ2ZmJPl2RavHuMYL2cXs9ItHuBiTAP0Ne7l~Tv4EJtKOfRjejfBsQN-PHENUU9ySiFWvVj8INiY~hSMUQ0AYFsJxLtDffEJV1huvKzxzpA~rgO730b6jNLChtghvFeI9Fzv7cj6Xy8DG56igeftNGrZAbWs85cnviI5ra4BPQ7oiNmp7jBZdE3I55DlbI2KMPpzhbSe0BvFQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Baltimore County","date","2025-04-11T18:00:51.547Z","article","The Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission ordered the owner of the Rodney House landmark complex to restore portions of an expanded asphalt driveway to its prior extent and voted to deny multiple applications for unpermitted exterior alterations across several buildings on the property at 14941–14943 York Road.

Preservation staff presented a consolidated work list after a code-enforcement correction and stop-work order prompted review of multiple ex post facto alterations. Staff said the property — designated Baltimore County landmark no. 367 by County Council bill 86-10 — included a primary random-rubble stone dwelling with a two-story frame L addition and seven historic outbuildings. Staff reported that recent work included paving laid over previous grass and garden beds, removal of small stone walls, vinyl siding and window replacements on ancillary structures, construction of a hyphen connecting a garage to the house, and other changes made without prior LPC review or building permits. Staff raised concerns about drainage and water runoff adjacent to foundations.

Commission action and votes

- Driveway restoration (driveway expansion resolution): Commissioners voted unanimously to require the property owner to return pavement to its former outline so green strips that previously separated pavement and buildings are restored. The motion was made and seconded during the meeting and passed on roll call. The commission noted staff concerns about paving flush to building foundations and potential runoff against historic masonry. The owner stated a willingness to restore the green strips but asked that staff consider that some asphalt may have existed historically in expanded form.

- Garage hyphen, siding and window alterations (14943 primary dwelling and garage): Commissioners voted to deny the application as presented for the hyphen connecting the 19?? garage to the main house, the recent vinyl siding, and replacement windows and doors where documentation of original dimensions and materials was not provided. Commissioners said the connected sequence of alterations had effectively changed the appearance and setting of the landmarked property and that attaching the garage to the landmarked structure required more careful design, documentation and review. The applicant indicated the current configuration was not the final design they intended and said they would resubmit drawings.

- Blacksmith shop and other accessory structures (14941 and related outbuildings): Commissioners voted to deny the application for the blacksmith shop alterations and requested a fuller submission with in-kind repair information. Staff asked for more detail on proposed repairs to German siding, board-and-batten additions, mortar composition for repointing, and matching window and door profiles. Commissioners recorded concerns about exterior mechanical lines (condensing/refrigerant lines) visible on historic elevations; one commissioner said visible HVAC lines need to be incorporated inside walls or otherwise hidden.

- Tenant house (vernacular house on the lot): Commissioners discussed proposed masonry repointing, standing-seam roof repairs, porch reassembly and window/door repairs. Because the application lacked specifications for mortars, methods and materials, the commission voted to deny the application as submitted but accepted an amendment allowing the owner to reinstall a missing standing-seam roof panel or make a temporary emergency repair to stop water penetration. Staff and commissioners asked the applicant to submit complete condition assessments and proposed methods (including mortar mix testing results) on resubmission.

Owner statements and staff follow-up

Owner representative Gregory (Mr. Gregorio) addressed the commission several times. He said some work had been performed by a partner without full awareness of LPC permitting requirements and that the property’s conditions included prior alterations and long-term changes over decades. He told commissioners he would work with staff to resubmit clearer, consolidated drawings. Commissioners and staff warned the applicant that continuing to remove historic materials or proceed without approval complicates review and that applicants should pause work and consult staff before further changes.

Next steps: The commission’s denials were without prejudice; staff will work with the owner on a resubmission that includes measured drawings, photographic documentation of original conditions, proposed in-kind materials for siding and windows, and a mortar analysis for masonry repointing. The commission also directed the owner to restore the driveway footprint as voted and asked staff to verify the restoration plan.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting, March 13, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission ordered restoration of expanded paving and denied several unpermitted exterior alterations at the Rodney House complex on York Road, citing changes made without LPC review and missing documentation.","taxTitle","Baltimore County, Maryland","taxId",3882,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6606644,"Baltimore County LPC fails to approve front-yard fence at Lutherville house after split vote",860,1632000,2492000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2963930-3e8f11996f0e60cdf3c718972413bf4a&start=1632&end=2492","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2963930-3e8f11996f0e60cdf3c718972413bf4a/thumbnail_1632000.jpg","/articles/6606644/Baltimore-County/Maryland/Baltimore-County-LPC-fails-to-approve-front-yard-fence-at-Lutherville-house-after-split-vote","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6606644-33ea0b78e2fa75302aa4e7cc7460c787/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146871&Signature=iAAit8BZNM5XgOE-Oyc17W-F24GeigE-6Wi9SUsEId8cqd1W2v7VJ7tR1-bE3RYEzAajRuH~1bSswB5IophzbtuhdSSY8T7GdmcR8X~K~UJmkUmZjNd49kUDI4vhlmXN2L94qqo5XwB3Wdu7Z67ZTua6ryzXgOn3GhIdtrlt3vUqHnARwFh1qN-zU5ebbbxKqjda6yyOMLQLp6wzPZneHJeeLVrCILRYkLhaforO9SibzJ~BM0OxWhIoNmUKSR5fylJThWKVhnRm2rxvddzXhsdciJfkFG7VrBvqebkqHbmP82vZ7X0PtMRIU2EiSI9vuhkJZZsMY6rUFaw9WtpS0Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission declined to approve an after-the-fact front-yard fence at 207 West Seminary Avenue in Lutherville after a split roll-call vote during its meeting.

Commissioners considered an application from the property owners seeking approval to finish installing a 42-inch Gothic-style wood picket fence behind existing hedges on the Seminary Avenue frontage. Staff told the commission that the material and style meet design guidelines and that locating the fence behind the hedges would minimize visibility; staff also reported receiving three letters opposing the fence.

The debate centered on whether front-yard fencing is consistent with the Lutherville historic streetscape, which staff said often features hedgerows rather than fences. Commissioners who opposed approval said approving the fence would set a precedent that could erode the district’s historic character, noting the streetscape historically relied on hedges and that enclosing front yards is not common. Commissioners who supported approval cited the property owners’ stated safety concerns for children and dogs near Seminary Avenue traffic and pointed out that some front-yard fences do exist elsewhere in the district.

Commissioner Chris Weston, who voted to approve the staff recommendation, said hedges and fences perform similar buffering functions but acknowledged the commission regulates fencing while landscaping does not. Commissioner Wendy MacGyver and others emphasized the district’s historic character and the prevalence of hedgerows rather than front-yard fences.

A motion to accept staff’s recommendation to approve the fence failed on a roll-call vote. Votes recorded in the meeting transcript were: Lily Mandroff — No; Daniel Dean — No; Wendy MacGyver — No; Chris Weston — Yes; Ed Hoard — No; John Holman — Yes; Jamie (last name not specified in transcript) — No; Scott Halovka — Yes; Ted McCatton — No; Tom Liebel — Yes; Phoebe Evans Latosha (chair) — No. Because fewer than seven commissioners voted in the affirmative, the motion did not pass and the application was not approved. The commission did not immediately adopt an alternate motion; staff advised the applicant could reapply with revisions.

The applicant was not present to speak; staff said applicants were contacted about the county’s historic-district requirements prior to construction. The meeting record shows commissioners encouraged the property owners to consult staff and suggested alternatives such as denser evergreen landscaping or resubmission with a narrower proposal.

The commission’s decision was procedural — the vote rejected the staff recommendation and did not include conditions approving any portion of the fence installation. The record indicates opponents had submitted written testimony and commissioners referenced preservation guidelines that caution against introducing front-yard fencing where it is not historically prevalent.

Next steps: the owner may revise and resubmit an application or seek other solutions such as planting denser evergreen hedging; staff said they would follow up with the applicant.","The Landmarks Preservation Commission did not approve an after-the-fact front-yard fence at 207 West Seminary Ave., Lutherville, after commissioners split over neighborhood character and safety arguments; a motion to accept staff’s recommendation failed on roll call.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6606633,"Baltimore County LPC approves two consent items and a revised rear-roof cover at 800 Francis Ave.; staff tax-credit approvals noted",810,775000,1585000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2963930-3e8f11996f0e60cdf3c718972413bf4a&start=775&end=1585","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2963930-3e8f11996f0e60cdf3c718972413bf4a/thumbnail_775000.jpg","/articles/6606633/Baltimore-County/Maryland/Baltimore-County-LPC-approves-two-consent-items-and-a-revised-rear-roof-cover-at-800-Francis-Ave-staff-tax-credit-approvals-noted","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6606633-8871749309d5588e1704f07d638ff840/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146871&Signature=HFafskOwbRy~OoY6jvlQqwcDUHeLtCaxB-XtgvZjpyuOvg4eZs5J72Ri4SHS8p1HacBpj9Bf0TxsQJUFcCG8nfFlZ9OXpLhb92kIeh6Iu0B2dA-htKwfBWxOf9iA64woKVrlbGiVVbdKIsdKJ3JI2inzz-3FZ75MO~x7lOqCZMxtJCW-EYnurvbFP~vjT078xSqw0boUA2Waf241mMZqOHsoYJtW562BYMrGUSUQ4Vt7-bc6Zf0amUVReYyPdELAxiKHd4z~k3DWf6APIK95p~WdwY7mHFiw0FOBirT6Zj85InuekbcTJ~MYMGyTmrKEo6iwh-9~SBz1Vsvwi2iTGQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission approved administrative minutes and two consent-agenda preservation cases, and approved a revised application for a rear shed roof at 800 Francis Avenue (the “Carnival” property) after receiving updated drawings and an amendment regarding column placement.

At the start of the meeting the commission approved the minutes of its previous session after a correction to identify Phoebe Evans Latosha as chair. Commissioners then approved two consent-agenda items presented by staff: part-2 in-kind asphalt roof replacements at the Hathaway property, 4946 Twelfth Avenue (Relay County Historic District, Council District 1), and part-2 approval for a rear deck and window-to-door conversion at the Hart property, 410 Fairmont Avenue (Parker House, final landmark, County Council District 6).

Carnival property (800 Francis Avenue, noncontributing resource in Relay Historic District)

Staff presented an updated submission for construction of a 10-by-24-foot shed roof over an existing rear open deck on a one-story rancher identified as a noncontributing resource in the Relay Historic District. At the commission’s previous meeting members had requested clearer drawings showing the relationship between proposed and existing rooflines, drainage details, and the finish of rakes, fascia and supports. The applicant returned with a drawing showing a two-foot gap between the proposed roof and the existing cross-gable valley and labeled rakes/fascia and wrapped supports; staff reported the plans did not show dimensions on the elevation drawings.

The project representative, Scott Chatten, clarified for the commission that the gap between the existing roof valley and the new roof was two feet (the prior submittal misstated it as two inches). Commissioners asked for detail on downspouts, gutter termination, and whether the work was visible from Rolling Road, which the commission noted is a prominent elevation given the corner lot condition. Commissioners discussed column placement; one commissioner moved to approve the application with a friendly suggestion that the owner consider placing support columns at the corners rather than centered in front of the doorway.

On roll call the motion to approve the revised rear-roof addition (as amended to recommend column placement at corners) passed. Recorded votes showed eight affirmative votes and three negative votes (Lily Mandroff — No; Ed Hoard — No; Phoebe Evans Latosha — No); commissioners who voted in favor included Chris Parts, Daniel Dean, Wendy MacGyver, Chris Weston, John Holman, Jamie, Scott Halovka, Ted McCatton and Tom Liebel (recorded as Yes during roll call). The committee approved the project with staff oversight to ensure downspouts and flashing details are documented.

Tax-credit and staff approvals

Staff also reported two Maryland historical-trust part-2 tax-credit approvals that were reviewed and approved at the staff level: the Miller property at 100 Fairfield Drive (Central Catonsville and Summit Park NRHD) for a new HVAC/heat-pump installation and sunroom rehabilitation, and the Hoselock property at 722 Howard Road (Suburb Park Historic District) for water heater replacement, chimney repair, front porch slate repair, gutter replacement, exterior painting and a radiator valve replacement.

Next steps and conditions

For the Carnival property staff was asked to verify downspout details, drainage and flashing on resubmitted details prior to final sign-off. For the consent agenda approvals, staff will proceed with processing the approved part-2 certificates. The commission’s roll-call record is included in the meeting minutes.","The commission approved minutes and two consent-agenda preservation cases, and approved a revised application for a 10-by-24-foot rear shed roof at 800 Francis Ave. The commission also noted two staff-approved Maryland Historic Tax Credit part 2 projects.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Baltimore County LPC orders driveway restoration, denies multiple unpermitted alterations at Rodney House property

Baltimore County LPC fails to approve front-yard fence at Lutherville house after split vote

Baltimore County LPC approves two consent items and a revised rear-roof cover at 800 Francis Ave.; staff tax-credit approvals noted