[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-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",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_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",6470317,"mediaKeyId","5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c","parentId",5779749,"title","Votes at a glance: Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission, Aug. 14, 2025","audioSeconds",5977,"startMs",434000,"endMs",6411000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c&start=434&end=6411","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c/thumbnail_434000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6470317/Baltimore-County/Maryland/Votes-at-a-glance-Baltimore-County-Landmarks-Preservation-Commission-Aug-14-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6470317-4c500770610dba46c44965d4d9eaf2d3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770916135&Signature=l1pLIuaQ32XNVq0uhMjmAb8dVtcGj0pNQ4E7xI6a4j~n0ZltXH0CGhpQEP24EcMb1We-0qkyc79KIytBJsQbFCFIH~XEukDDUI-fjJtV8Qn1AAFyrods7NjZgEXVlSDWKRsq9HUGBdW-9C8J0xFo~3b5k-2fYGWbWhFo6oPd7s3id44~QrMIgaLaKUWEHWqmQk1WnYVYb0uaIX7gp8MusL6ZYKfihTxybUXsFMXcc3Sjh9G1nSO8u777k0oRnfm77cBj7H3RhDqqQESoqgDAtQV2OK6mvRyK3L1UNZXgDkYHSMSuImZW82vxzs~hWsMFSg-N1zpep7sKHslp1n-krA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Baltimore County","date","2025-09-12T18:36:04Z","article","The Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission took the following formal actions at its Aug. 14, 2025 meeting. The list below records motions, movers/seconders when provided, and recorded outcomes.

Consent agenda and minutes
- Motion to approve minutes of the July 10, 2025 LPC meeting: approved (motion carried by roll call). Mover: Tom (identified at meeting); second: (not specified). Outcome: approved.
- Consent agenda items 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16 and 18 (various in‑kind repairs, fence installations, part 2 reviews across Lutherville, Ellicott City, Glendon, Towson, Green Spring Valley and Banneker Park & Museum): approved by roll call as a group. Outcome: approved.

Certificates of Appropriateness and other decisions (selected agenda items)
- Agenda item 4 (Maroney House, Ruxton): Motion to add to Baltimore County preliminary landmarks list under criterion 1 and 2, including the 0.44‑acre historic environmental setting. Mover: John Coleman; Second: Daniel Dean. Outcome: approved (unanimous roll call).
- Agenda item 5 (France property, 11906 Woodbury Place): Motion to issue COA for an 8 by 21‑foot addition and associated deck elements; staff recommendation to issue COA carried. Outcome: approved (roll call).
- Agenda item 8 (Hensler property, 11908 Jericho Road): Motion advanced and condition amended—roll call approved permitting a black aluminum 6‑foot fence around the rear yard perimeter (applicant agreed to include a short additional section to create a continuous enclosure to match existing yard conditions). Outcome: approved (roll call).
- Agenda item 13 (Church of the Holy Comforter, 120 West Seminary Avenue): Motion to approve landscaping and pavilion (phase 1) including aggregate paths, labyrinth, remembrance garden wall and pavilion; commissioners recommended metal roofing for the pavilion; staff to confirm materials prior to implementation. Mover: Daniel Dean; Second: Chris Parts. Outcome: approved (roll call).
- Agenda item 14 (Robins property, 1602 South Rolling Road): Motion to issue COA for screened porch over existing rear deck; applicant testimony noted family use; outcome: approved (roll call).
- Agenda item 16 (Dyer property, 206 McLaughlin Avenue): See separate article (notice to proceed for stamped concrete patio with conditional mitigation for hot tub screening within six months). Outcome: approved with conditions (8‑2 roll call).
- Agenda item 19 (Ferguson property, 786 Glen Avenue): This item was removed from the consent agenda to allow a commissioner recusal; the part 2 plumbing/drywall/window repairs application proceeded as part of the meeting under part 2 review and was approved as submitted. Outcome: approved (roll call).
- Agenda item 20 (Emeka, 3611 Stony Brook Road): Motion to deny the second‑story addition as submitted and request resubmittal with the project architect present addressing massing and roof drainage. Outcome: denied as submitted; resubmission requested (roll call).
- Agenda item 21 (Beckley House, 202 Main Street, Reisterstown): Motion to deny the current submittal and request detailed elevation‑by‑elevation drawings, product cut sheets and reconciliation with 2019 approvals. Outcome: denied as submitted; resubmission requested (roll call).
- Agenda item 22 (Thompson property, 3613 Stony Brook Road): Motion to deny proposed 6‑foot vinyl privacy fence and conditionally approve a 6‑foot wood stockade privacy fence (staff to review details). Outcome: vinyl denied; conditional approval for wood stockade subject to staff review (roll call).

Emergency and staff‑level approvals
- Several emergency or staff‑level part 2 approvals were recorded for in‑kind repairs and emergency roofing/HVAC/utility work at properties including Hammond (710 Cliveden Road), Meyer (5163 Viaduct Road), Pennington (304 Central Avenue), Whitman (4702 Butler Road), Sunderland (704 Cliveden Road West) and Attenborough (504 Dunkirk Road). Outcome: emergency part 2 approvals recorded; staff to document and close cases.

What to expect next
- The commission asked multiple applicants to resubmit with clearer elevation‑numbered plans and product specifications (notably Beckley House and Emeka addition). Staff will follow up with owners and provide technical guidance. The next LPC meeting may include a petition for delisting and a National Register nomination for review.

This summary lists each formal vote reported on the record in the Aug. 14 meeting; staff minutes and roll call records provide complete vote tallies and individual commissioner votes when needed.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting, September 11, 205","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of roll‑call outcomes from the Aug. 14 Baltimore County LPC meeting, including consent items, certificates of appropriateness, conditional approvals, and denials.","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},6470319,"Commission asks for fuller specifications on proposed repairs at Beckley House in Reisterstown",1328,4444000,5772000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c&start=4444&end=5772","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c/thumbnail_4444000.jpg","/articles/6470319/Baltimore-County/Maryland/Commission-asks-for-fuller-specifications-on-proposed-repairs-at-Beckley-House-in-Reisterstown","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6470319-7a02bf51ce2ba186604588f0665c2cec/orig.mp4?Expires=1770916135&Signature=jSFngUy3QewAQK5RW1wPxvV1S30GNx6xpNTZOWD-lPUTBDgQF3-ND75S2iw7nHjfjKkZKAbW94XO3qSaWk0wQoePmoQRYevV2hOp5XDjkeZU4DQ~WNlySSbmUTcxx9LFVeVgigR7cJtWe6oc9UheZ-3ra~VV9zfe03KC-ZIdVAWEMZ14yPX9LmGzxQqiLzeuAb~XjISKGqXlS-wtChPzwl5em978qdboylwZRZDwPISNxLZkKZinRzIu-luEmTvpC6mPsJMUxAx09OVDyu~DvT3VPM~2qLDuk6poSvngZVdURvSppvfyHQQqfwhOJOzOZ4Ri9Fb8tz71qap8X6NlZQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Landmarks Preservation Commission declined to approve the applicant\u0000as current set of exterior repair and replacement plans for the Beckley House (202 Main Street, Reisterstown), and asked the property owner to return with detailed elevation maps and product specifications before the commission will act.

Staff presented a multi‑part proposal that included roof membrane replacement, repair or replacement of standing seam metal roofing, replacement of damaged eaves/soffits/rakes/fascia (staff suggested painted wood or smooth‑textured composite instead of metal coil stock), replacement of gutters and downspouts with 6‑inch half‑round galvanized gutters and 4‑inch downspouts, and repairs to windows plus replacement of multiple second‑story vinyl windows.

The commission discussed the building\u0000ashistoric significance (the house dates to c.1779 and is a county final landmark), the presence of standing seam metal in historic photos, and the need for clearer documentation of what is original, what is later, and what precisely the owner proposes now. Commissioners requested explicit material samples and specification sheets for roof panels (profile and seam height), windows proposed for replacement, and the style and hanging hardware for any shutters. Staff and commissioners said the 2019 approvals should be reconciled with current proposals and that the applicant should submit a clear elevation‑numbered resubmittal showing exactly which elements will be repaired in kind and which will be replaced.

Property representative Brendan Schreiber said the owners purchased the building with the Reisterstown Improvement Association as an anchor tenant and that financing and underwriting after COVID delayed completion of the exterior work. He said he and the owners are willing to provide the requested product cut sheets and more detailed elevation‑by‑elevation documentation, and that some preservation‑grade metal options are being explored to achieve a visually compatible result.

Commissioner Ed Hord moved to deny the current application and ask the applicant to resubmit complete detail drawings, product specifications, and clear elevations; Commissioner Chris Parts seconded. The roll call vote was in favor of the resubmission request. Staff will provide guidance to the applicant on the documentation needed for an eventual conditional approval and noted the 2019 approvals remain a helpful reference but must be reconciled to the current scope.","The LPC declined the current application for roof, trim and window work at the historic Beckley House (202 Main Street) and asked the owner to return with detailed product specifications and elevation‑level documentation for review.",{"_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},6470324,"Commission denies second‑story addition proposal at Randallstown property, asks for redesign",1211,3729000,4940000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c&start=3729&end=4940","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c/thumbnail_3729000.jpg","/articles/6470324/Baltimore-County/Maryland/Commission-denies-secondstory-addition-proposal-at-Randallstown-property-asks-for-redesign","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6470324-ca4dc2e9efadd7a03a88675e65575381/orig.mp4?Expires=1770916135&Signature=kaAS7Xedsh9KkkthyC5K9HZG0fzsiwqAL99kpK-rgjGLG7bFqM0bVsN6i4bYZdI4RH~UvhWIvGtF6vvGK9I560lZiWdCcUWLA5qbnsvoSa7jE6112nBhYi54LrCdNZJ7M~YaXHn5nY4qVtT-0U7UiYN-J6JPBSq79d6Nu3rP~nCbnKdGGbF48NsKeOyBHxYR5uhc80g1pjiL6uXQlVv4NQ-jIAmah7OoHGYinksDQXk~vhxalBUVETEa~31J7Egch9bGHm5W9JXhMGUbhiQAiswIQvicj7N0s5cu1zN4RmT1PIGGhADuN0ZNYOs7dTkqKy1AxAVhJ436tKc61jzcGQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Landmarks Preservation Commission declined to approve a proposed second‑story rear addition at 3611 Stony Brook Road in Randallstown, concluding the design as submitted would create a visually heavy mass and could create roof drainage issues.

Staff described the proposal as a 27 foot, 6 inch by 17 foot, 3 inch second‑story addition over an existing patio; the addition would create a covered patio below and be finished in lap Hardie siding and shake detail. Staff recommended approval with the condition that only lap Hardie siding be used to keep the addition simple and consistent with neighboring noncontributing infill.

Applicant Jessica Emeka said the project is intended to keep her family in the house after her recent marriage and a blended family increase; she said she is willing to use a single siding type. Commissioners raised concerns about massing, the shed roof profile, the way the new roof would intersect existing roof slopes and valleys, and the potential for concentrated water at the roof junctions. Several commissioners described the addition as \"top heavy\" relative to the existing house and urged alternatives that reduce the apparent mass and better relate rooflines to existing eaves.

Commissioner John (last name not specified) moved to deny the application as submitted and to invite the owner to return with revised plans and the project architect present; Commissioner Chris Parts seconded. The roll call vote was affirmative and the motion carried. Commissioners recommended the applicant explore alternate solutions such as reconfigured first‑floor expansions, different roof forms, or shifting programmatic needs (bedrooms/bathrooms) to other parts of the house, and to return with plans that address eave, roof drainage and massing issues.

Staff will coordinate follow‑up with the owner and suggested the applicant consult an architect experienced in historic district additions before resubmitting.","The LPC denied a proposed 27.5 by 17.3 foot second‑story rear addition at 3611 Stony Brook Road, citing concerns about scale, roof connections and drainage; the commission asked the applicant to return with revised plans and their architect present.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6470329,"Commission issues notice to proceed for Dyer patio; requires screening for hot tub within six months",3731,3333000,7064000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c&start=3333&end=7064","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c/thumbnail_3333000.jpg","/articles/6470329/Baltimore-County/Maryland/Commission-issues-notice-to-proceed-for-Dyer-patio-requires-screening-for-hot-tub-within-six-months","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6470329-5c3d3643dbfe1134e0a03fc381b9e1b1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770916135&Signature=RyuljVkQGSKw46I5nV4xJfU1BSqahvK-VAH6sAk6C6vT4rp6Hiq9KNKCsxXqyN1VEqvq0IRTzDfqqGRFQCRwXsISsLlWN8RV7APa7Y3pLwyrHE~R8mEF4mTHi53WiSB3pUs~wVqw91qTR9k7ovKOxBk9ct3mZRwelfqfSmuwZALy1DEtRDZB-27eByyezFxoJicJ9z9skVb3260ThPHCoL3BC4Ua5bdRmVtPMpDcVsE7yDNYAAsE7bn6ELLX5jXzoFXp2g3-0vCTFlFqmj0-IgH7ZJF1guDyxEHfbcKumqagU-IXk1Km9qUAyR7SCoofPB-n9LjshYecVWn1RnFEqQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to grant a notice to proceed for an ex post facto stamped‑concrete patio at 206 McLaughlin Avenue and to allow the adjacent hot tub to remain, provided the owners install substantial landscaping to screen the hot tub from public view within six months.

Staff presented background: the patio and hot tub had been installed without prior LPC review; the commission had asked for a fuller site plan and materials information at the February meeting. The revised application shows a 24 by 20 foot stamped concrete patio laid in an \"Old English slate\" pattern (color: \"cold light\"). Staff noted that stamped concrete is not the first‑choice material in the historic district but is sometimes allowed on a case‑by‑case basis, particularly when visibility from the public right‑of‑way is limited.

Owners Julie and Patrick Dyer told the commission they did not intend to bypass the process, apologized for the oversight and said the patio location is far back from the street and set down below grade. They said many neighbors expressed no objection in person and that they intend to plant a screen of evergreen trees (they mentioned Emerald Green arborvitae) to conceal the hot tub. The Dyers said the choice of stamped concrete was driven by cost and the material\u0000asimilarity to stone in appearance.

Commissioners discussed visibility, precedent, and mitigation. Several commissioners said they prefer natural materials but recognized the patio is substantially set back and not easily visible from the street. The commission also discussed whether screening should be a condition and whether the hot tub should be moved; owners said backyard space was limited and the current placement was the least intrusive.

Commissioner Lily Mandra moved to issue a notice to proceed for the patio and to approve the hot tub on the condition that the owners install substantial evergreen screening to conceal the hot tub from Division Avenue and the front street within six months; Commissioner John Coleman seconded. In the ensuing roll call the motion carried with eight votes in favor and two opposed.

Staff said the typical code timeline for remedying a code violation is six months; the commission directed staff to follow up and close out the code notice after verification that screening has been planted and established. The owners said they will work with staff on appropriate planting specifications.","After an acknowledgement of an ex post facto patio and hot tub installation, the Landmarks Preservation Commission granted a notice to proceed for the stamped‑concrete patio and approved the hot tub on the condition that new landscaping be installed to screen the tub within six months.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6470334,"Landmarks commission adds Maroney House in Ruxton to preliminary landmarks list",2507,805000,3312000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c&start=805&end=3312","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5779749-21e12f1775ac66c3a539b1d81242350c/thumbnail_805000.jpg","/articles/6470334/Baltimore-County/Maryland/Landmarks-commission-adds-Maroney-House-in-Ruxton-to-preliminary-landmarks-list","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6470334-ae6d1b6e39f3015d346ce75b5c3b89fb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770916135&Signature=nKcVUyENP8D1lggiNkJIz1MwOUmO~HSeHzt6d6Ue8uPtGG2VlHW3-DTIEdoq6zl-QlPXctsaQKUAlG55MQ84uNBxK7tIgVxHwKyFL~WwyfjaPNa-jWD507y1WsPoDYNWZabOIUW5C~ZeqheS24AAj5ozHPsyknb4n0n1DNxjsEf4t7Oxh2RXjXVqh4AAeONX91Ghshh0c9S8daQU~-ii5lwGg9N5Sfm34E2ZvplkPCdHqGoZdjb1iHPmNMRlVbQA8-odlH0TE-0Wu9QVuwk-ISByHgRs55nTeXuq95YLopedE6EnwXjtEP5y39A7L1aXi36Np3mERecnIt5bYYqvSw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to add the Maroney House at the southwest corner of Ruxton Road and LeRoy and Del Club Road to the county
preliminary landmarks list, citing association with notable past owners and the house\u0000aQueen Anne architectural character.

Commission Chair Phoebe Evans Latosha opened the public hearing after staff summarized the nomination and research supporting eligibility under county criteria and the Secretary of the Interior\u0000aStandards for rehabilitation. Staff told the commission the two most supportable criteria were criterion 1 (association with persons or events of historic significance) and criterion 2 (distinctive architectural style or type).

The nomination was submitted by Ruxton resident Joseph Cole, who told the commission the house stands at a visible center of Ruxton and that its original fabric has not been substantially compromised. Owner Cassandra London, who closed on the property within weeks of learning of the nomination, said she intends to preserve the house and restore historic elements where feasible but later told commissioners she was not in favor of the designation. London described the house as in worse condition than shown in photos, said she has obtained window repair quotes approaching \"almost $100,000,\" and asked for time to work with staff on restoration plans.

Commission discussion focused on the property\u0000ashistory of ownership, the house\u0000asurviving material features (German siding, slate roof, multi-pane wood windows and shutters), and precedents for including the parcel\u0000a(0.44 acre as recorded in the nomination) as the landmark\u0000ahistoric environmental setting. Commissioners clarified that the commission\u0000aresponsibility is limited to exterior features and setting; interior work is outside the LPC\u0000apurview unless tied to a tax credit application.

Commissioner John Coleman moved to add the property to the preliminary landmarks list under criteria 1 and 2 and to include the entire 0.44‑acre parcel as the historic environmental setting; Commissioner Daniel Dean seconded. The roll call vote was unanimous in favor and the motion carried.

Staff told the owner that if the nomination advances toward final landmark review the commission and staff will provide guidance about windows and other exterior elements, and that exterior review and design guidance (not interior controls) follow preliminary listing. Staff also noted letters of support circulated with the nomination, including a letter from the district council member.

The commission will forward the nomination as a preliminary landmark for the next steps in the county process. Staff said it will follow up with the owner with information about next steps, potential funding sources, and technical guidance on window repair and paint removal.","The Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission voted unanimously to place the circa‑1888 Maroney House in Ruxton on the county\u0000preliminary landmarks list under criteria for historic association and architectural significance.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission, Aug. 14, 2025

Commission asks for fuller specifications on proposed repairs at Beckley House in Reisterstown

Commission denies second‑story addition proposal at Randallstown property, asks for redesign

Commission issues notice to proceed for Dyer patio; requires screening for hot tub within six months

Landmarks commission adds Maroney House in Ruxton to preliminary landmarks list