Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission approves St. James Church perimeter fence and north-elevation brick repairs at 800 Cincinnati

Lafayette Historic Preservation Commission · June 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Lafayette Historic Preservation Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness for St. James Church to replace failing stucco with matching brick on the north elevation and install metal perimeter fencing with automatic and pedestrian gates around the block.

The Lafayette Historic Preservation Commission on June 22 approved a certificate of appropriateness for work at St. James Church, 800 Cincinnati, authorizing replacement of failing stucco on the north elevation with matching brick and installation of a new metal perimeter fence around the block.

Staff member Michael introduced the application, saying the north face contains failing stucco that is allowing moisture into the building and that replacing it with brick would match existing masonry. He said the perimeter work would remove much of the existing green chain-link fencing and replace it with metal picket fencing of varying heights — taller along the exterior of the block, shorter near interior playground areas — and would include about five gates, both pedestrian and automatic sliding types.

Dan, who identified himself as a member of St. James, said he would recuse himself from historic-preservation judgment but noted safety concerns, asking that the pedestrian gates between the school and the church office include panic hardware so people are not locked inside.

Commission discussion focused on fence placement (adjusted to run up to an existing corner building rather than enclosing it), gate locations and operation, and the materials and heights proposed. Staff confirmed the materials and general locations met commission parameters, and petitioners said where existing fence existed it would largely be replaced in the same locations.

A commissioner moved to approve the COA; the motion was seconded and the commission voted to approve the project.