February 19, 2025 • 50 mins
This very special episode explores the controversial Maxwell Development Project in Lexington, highlighting the threats to historic homes and the complicated intersection of progress and preservation. With insights from Dr. Zak Leonard of the Bluegrass Trust, the discussion delves into zoning laws, the role of city governance, and how citizens can advocate for their neighborhoods. In this episode we examine:
- Historic significance of homes on Maxwell Street
- The impact of zoning changes on preservation efforts
- Awareness surrounding House Bill 443 and its implications for public input
- National Register misconceptions
- Strategies for community advocacy and organizing
- Dr. Leonard's journey in historic preservation and its importance in Lexington
- Call to action for listeners to engage with local preservation efforts
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Erica Friis (00:00):
Welcome to a very special episode of the Lexington
podcast called Preserving OurPast, where we're going to
explore the sometimes dramaticintersection of progress and
preservation.
We've got a fascinating episodefor you about a development
saga that has been unfoldingright here in Lexington over the
past two years, and we'rethrilled to welcome Dr Zach
(00:22):
Leonard, historic PreservationManager of the Bluegrass Trust,
who's going to break down allthe ongoing drama surrounding
the Maxwell Street DevelopmentProject, you know the one where
a six-story student apartmentcomplex is set to replace
several historic homes near UK'scampus.
Dr Leonard is going to walk usthrough Lexington's development
process and explain somethingthat might surprise you how
(00:45):
houses that are centuries oldand listed on the National
Register of Historic Places canstill somehow get demolished.
We'll also discuss a concerningnew state bill that could
potentially limit public inputon what happens in our historic
neighborhoods.
And if you're wondering whatyou can do to ensure your
neighborhood's voice is heard byour, let's say, evolving city
(01:09):
council, dr Leonard has someactionable advice for you as
well.
So grab your coffee, settle in,let's dive into this eye-opening
conversation about the past,present and future of
Lexington's historic landscape.
Don't go anywhere.
Don't go anywhere.
(01:51):
Glad you're here, y'all.
Okay, hi, I am back with DrZach Leonard of the Bluegrass
Trust.
Super kind to be able to joinme today to talk about what we
have in emails dubbed theMaxwell drama and trauma.
So hi, dr Leonard, how are you?
Zak Leonard (02:06):
Doing well.
Thank you for having me.
Erica Friis (02:08):
Thank you so much.
I was so excited to have youover because you're actually
only like my second or thirdpodcast guest ever, at least in
this room that we're in rightnow.
So I know I cleaned up for you,wanted to make sure that
everything looked all right.
And I'm super excited to haveyou over because the Bluegrass
Trust is something that's supernear and dear to my heart and I
(02:28):
want to hear about what's goingon lately with the Maxwell
Project, so to speak.
So I know you've been heavilyinvolved in it.
You've been going to councilmeetings about it.
You've written in the HeraldLeader op-ed pieces Very well
written, by the way.
I love your writing style.
I thank you, Of course.
So why don't you, for ourlisteners who don't know about
the Maxwell Project how it'sdefinitely a point of contention
(02:49):
in regards to historicpreservation here in Lexington
tell us about it?
Zak Leonard (02:53):
All right.
Well, this is a rather involvedsaga that involves analyzing
comp plans, zoning changes andwhatnot, but I will try to
simplify it for your audience.
Essentially, I have beeninvolved in really challenging
(03:13):
this project since October 2023,my how the time flies.
So the area we are talkingabout is really East Maxwell and
then Stone Avenue.
This encompasses 13 propertiesthat are listed on the National
Register, the early of whichdates to 1885.
(03:37):
Most of them are kind of lateVictorian, some, you know, early
colonial revival examples, andwhen these were built, these
houses were single familyhousing.
They were residences for quiteillustrious faculty members at
the University of Kentucky,congressional representatives,
and they have, admittedly,suffered neglect really since
(04:02):
the 80s, and it was around thattime that they came under kind
of the ownership of a single LLCwho then rented them out to
students.
Erica Friis (04:12):
Okay, so it's like student housing.
Zak Leonard (04:13):
It is student housing now and I think there
are kind of some social welfarelike recovery programs in some
of the houses too.
Based on my conversations withstudents just on the street,
these buildings essentially dofunction as affordable housing,
certainly more so than thestudio and one bedroom
(04:34):
apartments that will be going intheir place, and we can only
guess at how much the rentalrates on those will be.
Erica Friis (04:41):
Oh, I can't imagine .
Yeah, so the overall goal wasthat some.
So it was an LLC for severalhouses and then somebody has
come in and bought those houses.
Now a developer from DublinOhio.
Dublin, ohio, okay, so not evenin Kentucky, no.
And then that developer hasdecided to tear down these
(05:04):
houses and built a four or fivestory apartment complex.
Zak Leonard (05:09):
Six story fronting Maxwell, potentially seven story
in the rear, although they havenever produced any elevation
drawings of that.
But it's Maxwell kind of itslopes down going towards high
street.
So there's variation in thetopography.
Erica Friis (05:25):
Okay.
Zak Leonard (05:35):
And then it will step down to about three stories
on Lexington.
Yeah as to, you know reallywhat the role of the city is to
ensure that this new housingcompliments and really
harmonizes with the existinghistoric buildings that surround
it.
Erica Friis (05:53):
Which is the Aylesford district.
Is that right?
Okay, aylesford was AylesfordOkay.
Zak Leonard (05:58):
I say Aylesford.
Erica Friis (05:59):
No, you're probably right.
Zak Leonard (06:00):
That's my northern accent.
Erica Friis (06:01):
No, I love it.
Zak Leonard (06:02):
I always mispronounce things in the city.
I love it pronounce things inthe city.
Uh, to ellsford I and this.
I'm happy you brought that upbecause ellsford has been a
local historic district underkind of the purview of the city
since 1996 and this project areaof which I am speaking was
initially supposed to beincluded in that historic
district.
(06:22):
Um, the guy that owned it atthe time and this is from what I
have heard slash discovered inour records basically said that
he would tank the entiredesignation of the entire
district if this section,including the houses he owned,
was included in it, and that'swhy okay it.
These buildings are notprotected oh, no, no.
Erica Friis (06:43):
So for our listeners, tell us if you're a
house in part of an older partof Lexington, what makes you
designated as being protected ornot protected?
Let's say, what does thatprocess look like?
Zak Leonard (06:59):
So really there are two levels of designation one
that entails protection on thelocal level and one that doesn't
.
So you can be in a nationalregister district or
individually listed, which givesyou certain advantages if you
want, to say, pursue historictax credits for rehabilitations.
But you can blow up a house inthe national register and no one
(07:21):
is going to come stop you.
This is kind of a commonmisconception.
And then you also have what wecall H1 overlays in the city.
They are generally referred toas local historic districts.
They often encompass NationalRegister districts, but in the
case of what we're seeing herein Maxwell, the local historic
district Aylesford is smallerthan the greater National
(07:44):
Register district, which Ibelieve is called the greater
National Register District,which I believe is called the
Southeastern Commercial HistoricDistrict or something like that
.
Erica Friis (07:50):
Okay so they the guy who had owned it did not
want those to be a part ofAylesford.
Yes, okay.
So this is it's like a weirdloophole of sorts, because they
are totally historic houses, yes, and within historic districts
to some capacity, but not on thelet's say like for sure, let's
save them, kind of thing.
Zak Leonard (08:11):
Yeah, so the city really has no jurisdiction over
what happens to these houses.
If they were, you know, twoblocks East past, uh Rose, they
would be protected.
And if you were to alter themin any substantial way besides
you know normal wear and tearrepair you would need to get a
(08:33):
certificate of appropriatenessfrom city.
Okay, and then if there was anykind of controversy, it would
go before the board ofarchitectural review.
Erica Friis (08:41):
So that was my next question was so the city of
Lexington still had to pass orallow this developer to tear
down those houses in the firstplace?
Or like, even beyond just therebeing historic protections,
doesn't Lexington, the cityitself, get to say what is built
and what like?
The developer has to go throughsome red tape with the city of
(09:02):
Lexington.
Zak Leonard (09:02):
Yeah, and it's complicated.
Every case is different.
In this particular instance,the developer needed a zone
change from r4 uh, which thesebuildings currently were zoned
as, and in r4 you know they,there are open space minimums,
there are vegetation minimums.
The building can only take upso much of the parcel.
(09:24):
Developer got it rezoned to b2a, which is supposed to be
reserved for kind of the coredowntown area, and this was the
crux of our debate before theplanet commission, which was
what is downtown where is that?
okay, yeah, yeah if we can see acertain mural or a building,
are we downtown, downtown, sure,and the conclusion was that
(09:45):
downtown is just a verysubjective category.
Erica Friis (09:48):
Yeah, oh, I'm sure, and Lexington is so unique in
the sense that our downtown isso close to the university and
so I'm sure there's a lot oflike overlap.
That's in this like gray areatoo, Because this is, you know,
quote unquote student housingvery close to UK.
But is that considered downtownor not?
Zak Leonard (10:12):
Yeah, and if you read the zoning ordinance it's
pretty clear that B2A should bereserved for what people would
consider to be kind of the maindrag where, like you know, the
nightlife, the entertainmentthings of that sort are located,
not in a historicallyresidential neighbor, Gotcha.
Erica Friis (10:23):
So the developer puts up the plan for this new
apartment building, and thenwhat happens?
Zak Leonard (10:31):
Well, because they wanted to get the zone changed,
they had to submit a preliminarydevelopment plan, which then
makes its way up through thetechnical committee, subdivision
committee to the planningcommission.
Erica Friis (10:44):
Okay.
Zak Leonard (10:45):
And that's where the Blue Grass Trust really
became, I think.
Erica Friis (10:49):
Took notice.
Zak Leonard (10:52):
In a kind of a public capacity.
Before the planning commission,we had published stories about
the affected buildings, theirhistories, their architecture,
and that's on our social mediapages.
Do you run the social mediapages?
We also.
Erica Friis (11:06):
Do you run the social media pages for the
Bluegrass Trust?
Zak Leonard (11:09):
I produce a lot of content.
Erica Friis (11:10):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, no, I love it.
Zak Leonard (11:12):
Anything that involves a, you know, a deep
dive into a building is probablymy work.
Erica Friis (11:16):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's very well done.
By the way, yeah, you're sowelcome.
Sorry, I didn't mean tointerrupt.
I was I.
I think it's great forlisteners to know that that is
such a phenomenal resource foranybody who's interested in
Lexington history.
Zak Leonard (11:28):
But also, you've been chronicling this situation
to like yeah, and I mean oursocial media really functions
these days to advance oureducation objectives, because
many of the buildings that Ifeature have not been properly
inventoried.
They might have Bluegrass Trustplaques.
On Fridays I like to do aForgotten Friday feature that
(11:48):
feels, you know, just demolishedbuildings that no longer exist.
But this and again, withoutgoing on a tangent, the Kentucky
State Historic Inventory ofthese resources in most cases
has not been updated since 1979,1980.
Oh, wow.
So this is kind of theBluegrass Trust's contribution
to updating the information andsharing these stories Absolutely
(12:09):
More widely.
Yes, yes, but aside from doingthose social media posts, I also
set up this petition that gotjust about 3,000 signatures,
opposing the rezoning and theredevelopment opposing the
rezoning and the redevelopmentand a lot of the there was, you
know, talk about the reason why,like, well, who cares?
Erica Friis (12:29):
It's just shitty student housing, right, Was that
pretty much the like for youraverage person that is not a
developer?
Was that that side Like whywould someone not want to sign
this and not want to supportsaving these houses?
Zak Leonard (12:42):
That was certainly the rationale that the lawyer
for the developers gave us.
Erica Friis (12:48):
So much.
Zak Leonard (12:49):
So the example I gave of, you know, a possible
adapter for use was actually theKimball House Square
development which is on SouthLimestone.
Erica Friis (13:00):
Yeah, where they're connected in the back with
glass.
Yeah, were there, connected inthe back with glass.
Zak Leonard (13:04):
Yes, A bunch of kind of late Italian Romanesque
buildings that formerly servedas the Kimball House Hotel.
Fun story once upon a time,apparently, there was a monkey
house in the back that you couldvisit A monkey house, a monkey
house, yeah, okay, in the backof South Limestone.
Houses.
Erica Friis (13:19):
Like several monkeys, yeah monkeys.
Zak Leonard (13:22):
Where did these monkeys come from?
Erica Friis (13:24):
We don't know.
I think they might have beenlab monkeys, but don't quote me
oh gotcha okay, this is deephistory here well, you know,
I've just done a huge deep diveinto um the narco farm.
So I wonder if there's somesort of like link that I just
think everything's linked tonarco, like I just have it in my
head.
So maybe there was lab monkeysat narco, but okay, go on, sorry
(13:44):
.
Exactly, it's not that farfetched.
Zak Leonard (13:49):
Crazier things have happened.
Erica Friis (13:49):
Crazier things have happened.
Zak Leonard (13:51):
But essentially, yeah, those buildings were
rehabbed and they were unitedwith a whole block of new
construction in the rear.
And that is something that theMaxwell parcel could have
accommodated is new constructionbehind the historic properties.
But that was kind of shot downout of hand by the developers,
(14:11):
probably because it would havebeen more expensive, even though
those the houses on Maxwellwould be eligible for state and
federal historic tax credits 20%of qualified rehab expenses.
They also made some kind ofdinky argument that because the
Kimball House Square developmenthad happened, it happened
really during the recession, Ibelieve, and the developer there
(14:33):
there were some financialissues but that was because of
the recession, not because ofthe feasibility of the building
project.
Erica Friis (14:41):
Yeah, that is a dinky argument.
Zak Leonard (14:43):
Dinky.
Yeah, I don't like that at allyeah, that's pretty lame and but
now I mean I can't.
I can't imagine those houses onlimestone not existing there
totally and again, those are ina national register.
Erica Friis (14:56):
Yeah, district as well, and it's just one of my
favorite stretches of lexingtonlike and it's such a major
stretch between campus anddowntown and I thoroughly look
forward to it.
I think it connects that littlecorridor so nicely and I just
can't imagine those houses notbeing there.
It's such a great, greatexample of adaptive reuse.
(15:17):
And to your point, too, about Idon't think our average
listener, maybe the averageLexingtonian, really knows that
there's so much good to adaptivereuse in regards to, like, what
developers can do in terms oftax credits, right.
So why isn't that enough?
I guess kind of the classicquestion in historic
preservation might be why isn'tthat enough for developers to
(15:39):
want to adaptively reusesomething instead of tearing
something to the ground andrebuilding themselves?
I mean, it's not as simple asthat.
I know it's always complicated.
It's certainly going to bedifferent for each and every
project, but why do you thinkdevelopers are so quick to be
like, no, we're not going tothink about rehabbing this.
Zak Leonard (15:57):
I think and this is maybe just speculation, but in
the case of the Maxwell parcel,they were just thinking about
how many units they could squashinto it, and I think it's about
700 beds with 165 or so parkingspaces within the building.
Erica Friis (16:15):
So it's just like simple math money, money, money.
Zak Leonard (16:17):
Yeah, got it, got it.
Yeah, no-transcript employeeworking in the planning
(16:43):
department.
If you're a developer and theonly thing you have in your mind
are these density targets thatare calculated with some
algorithm that you know we meremortals are not privy to, that's
only one facet of planning thatcompletely trumps, or rather
excludes, how people interactwith their built environment,
how these communities such asEllsford will function with just
(17:05):
a seven, six, seven storybuilding plop down in the middle
.
I mean, it's not even theconstruction, the building.
they're gonna be blowing up halfa Hagerman court and
redirecting it onto Stone Aveyeah and up until you know, a
few weeks ago, the developerswanted that segment to be a
private with a public easement,and thankfully the city said no,
(17:26):
you can't really do that, yeah,yeah yeah, um, can't just
colonize the neighborhoodcompletely you don't own it,
yeah, okay.
Erica Friis (17:34):
So then, okay, what ?
What happened next with withthis situation?
Like so we're at the pointwhere they have come with plans,
right, and then the city hassaid what?
Zak Leonard (17:46):
So the Planning Commission and this was back in
late 2023, approved the rezoningto B2A, and that was contingent
on the developers abiding bythe final development plan and
the renders of the building thatthey had submitted.
Okay, so what did the rendersof the building that they had
submitted?
Erica Friis (18:04):
Okay, so what did the renders look like?
Zak Leonard (18:07):
Oh, there were various versions.
Erica Friis (18:10):
Okay.
Zak Leonard (18:12):
The final development plan render at that
time, had it had step backs fromStone Ave and the planning
staff and the developer's lawyerat the time may emphasize the
necessity of those step backscreating these townhouse units
that were about two stories talland would kind of blend in more
(18:34):
seamlessly with the otherhouses on Stone Ave.
Erica Friis (18:36):
Okay, so the facades are going to look fairly
historic.
Zak Leonard (18:40):
Yeah, that's how it was sold at least, and there
was a variety of claddingmaterials window shapes,
fenestrations but they reallyemphasized at the time kind of
activating this ground space andhaving a quote unquote front
porch feel.
Erica Friis (19:00):
Okay.
Okay, because there's otherhouses in the area that also
have kind of a front porch yeahthey're bungalow types, right?
Yeah, so to speak, or not notquite, because it's 1800s, right
late, yeah, they're I meanreally two mostly two-story
brick homes, the various stylesand ornamentation.
Zak Leonard (19:17):
Some are bungalows, more on stone app than on
Maxwell Okay, but the Maxwellhouses are I mean, some of them
are actually of a decent size.
So how they would havefunctioned in the earlier 20th
century is that, you know, youwould have had your permanent
residence but they would havelet out certain rooms to borders
.
Erica Friis (19:34):
Okay, cool.
So they come up with this finalplan.
And it was approved byLexington.
Yes, and then what?
And it was approved byLexington.
Zak Leonard (19:39):
Yes, and then what?
So we were then agitating forthe council, the city council,
to review the planningcommission's decision, because
they have the ability to do that.
And this opened a whole othercan of worms, because the city
council, in a split vote,decided just to approve the
(20:03):
rezoning, without any furtherpublic comment.
Erica Friis (20:06):
This is the council from last year.
Okay.
Zak Leonard (20:09):
Yeah.
Erica Friis (20:09):
Which was a very interesting council, I think in
general.
I mean, it was a.
Several of them did not get I'msaying this you're not, but
several you know there's been alot it was a.
It was a huge shakeup of whowas on that last year and it was
definitely a kind of a shakeupof who was back and who's not
back this year, and that was a.
I'm speaking specifically onthe.
(20:31):
They also approved to expandthe urban growth boundary.
So this was a council that waspretty big about like let's just
do a lot.
Zak Leonard (20:38):
Don't you think?
Yeah, I mean in this particularcase and you know anyone can go
back and watch the videos ofthese hearings on the government
website but there seemed to bea contention amongst the council
members as to what the purviewof their power really was.
There were some that said, ohwell, we shouldn't review any
planning commission decisionsthat get a unanimous vote.
(21:01):
And there are others saying,well, the planning commission
are not elected representatives,we are, and if we are granting
some people an appeal and therewere other cases that same day
about rezonings that got theirappeals heard we should kind of
grant them across the board.
Erica Friis (21:16):
How do you feel about that?
Zak Leonard (21:18):
It was disappointing because I believe
it was the council member forDistrict 3, where the project is
based, who voted, who reallymotioned to approve the rezoning
and didn't give any explanationof that decision making.
And, kind of to add insult toinjury, the modus operandi, so
(21:39):
to speak, of the council memberswas not to receive any
correspondence or communicationfrom their constituents
involving rezonings.
Erica Friis (21:48):
Why.
Zak Leonard (21:49):
Because they claim and again I submitted an open
records request we have thisfrom their aides in which they
say the council members mayserve in a quasi-judicial
function when they areevaluating the zone changes and
any testimony or correspondencefrom constituents might kind of
prejudice at a time.
Erica Friis (22:08):
Oh, interesting Wow .
Zak Leonard (22:09):
So and the takeaway from this was and I think this
is in the third op-ed I wrotewas that council members, you
know, in issues involving ofgreat magnitude, such as
rezonings that affect entireneighborhoods, may never have a
chance to hear directly from thepeople they're supposed to be
representing.
And you know, we can talk aboutthe comp plans too, but once we
(22:31):
didn't get that hearing beforethe council, we then filed a
suit to get the case consideredbefore the circuit court because
we really had no other option.
Yeah, you're back into yeah andthe judge at the circuit court,
basically, you know, confirmedthat cities, city agencies, when
(22:54):
they are dealing with planning,do not have to really implement
every aspect of a comp plan,because that would just be
unmanageable and to a degreethat makes sense.
But if it's permissible just tofocus on the density goals and
exclude everything in the compplans that has to do with
historic preservation andcompatible design, where does
(23:15):
that leave us?
Erica Friis (23:15):
Right, yeah, golly.
So it's like it's so much morecomplicated than I think meets
the eye and there's so manyplayers involved.
I think that's what's kind ofoverwhelming about it too.
You would think, like in anyfacet of government, there
should be a lot of like checksand balances along the way, and
it seems as though some thingsget that and some things don't.
Zak Leonard (23:36):
Well, I think the trend that is kind of
disconcerting to me is thecity's unwillingness to really
bring in the public and treattheir opinions seriously.
You know, even when the councilwas debating reviewing the
planning commission's decision,certain council members had
acknowledged that there was alot of hostility towards this
(23:57):
project from the community.
People had been airing theirgrievances, but they were
willing to disregard that publicinput as just noise or loudness
.
And this is, you know, thisdisinclination to hear from
Lexingtonians about theneighborhoods they inhabit.
Also, it extends to otherplanning issues too, and this
(24:18):
might be a good opportunity totalk about House Bill 443.
Do you know much about that?
No, please tell me about HouseBill 443.
Erica Friis (24:22):
Do you know much about that?
No, please tell me.
House Bill 443?
Yeah, it is coming.
Zak Leonard (24:26):
It has been approved, so it is now law,
section 100.275 of the KRS andthis new piece of legislation.
Again the city is going to haveto change its zoning ordinance
in the way it does things toreally meet these objectives
that are being put forth at thestate level.
Is that basically planningdecisions involving development
(24:49):
plans and subdivision plots andall that?
They have to adhere toobjective standards and be
approved ministerially.
That is the language.
What does ministerially mean?
Basically, by theadministration, without
substantial exercise ofdiscretion okay, so it's.
Erica Friis (25:08):
That's essentially a box ticking exercise and what
will be in the box well thatit's.
Zak Leonard (25:16):
This new piece of legislation has probably under
100 words to it.
So it is oh wow yeah, um, andthere are carve-outs that are
themselves extremely vague.
But the takeaway here seems tobe that while preliminary
development plans will go beforethe planning commission, final
(25:38):
development plans will not.
So the developer can submitsomething and then, you know, a
year on, might have to deal withLester committees subdivision
committee, technical reviewcommittee but there won't be
another kind of public hearingon the project.
Erica Friis (25:55):
So this is really good for developers and terrible
for historic preservation.
Zak Leonard (25:59):
Yeah, I mean.
It just makes it very difficultfor the public to air their
views.
Erica Friis (26:05):
Yeah, which obviously is already a problem.
Zak Leonard (26:08):
Yeah, and I mean there are.
From what we've heard, cityplanning staff have been
reaching out to developers aboutthings like this legislation to
get on the same page.
Same for the new downtownmaster plan that's in the works
but you know no one's contactedus for input yeah no one's
(26:29):
contacted the neighborhoodassociations for input.
It just seems to be thisdealing between the city and the
developer community that I meangross, like how is this allowed
to?
Erica Friis (26:43):
it seems like where did this come from?
Like why now?
And why they're just trying tostreamline this process to make
it both easier and less noisefor the process of development.
Zak Leonard (26:55):
That seems to be the way it looks.
Erica Friis (26:57):
Okay, wow.
So what can we as the publicand in the historic preservation
community, those that arepassionate about I don't know
everything from ourneighborhoods to having a voice
about our neighborhoods, whatcan we do to, I guess, lobby
against this, or what do you seeas the best course of action to
take?
Zak Leonard (27:25):
Because a lot of, at least concerning the bill,
the law now that I justmentioned, it's still up in the
air and the city doesn't evenreally know how it's going to
have to alter its codes.
But more generally, I would sayI think the neighborhood
associations still have anamount of power.
I think in many cases theirranks just need to be
replenished with new membershipand the neighborhood
associations would benefit fromcoordinating their efforts more
with one another.
Everything's a bit balkanizedright now.
(27:48):
In some cases it's evendifficult to figure out who is
supposed to be chairing aneighborhood association.
So again, we do have a crop ofnew council members who, I
imagine, would be very willingand, you know, amenable to
hearing from the neighborhoodassociations.
They might just not have thebackground and preservation,
(28:09):
understand the necessity of it,and that's fine, you know.
That's why we exist too is tospread that knowledge Totally.
We are trying.
Erica Friis (28:15):
Yes, yes, so the?
Is there an overarchingneighborhood associate, like
where they all come together, Iwonder?
Zak Leonard (28:23):
There, the?
Is there an overarchingneighborhood associate, like
where they all come together?
I wonder?
There used to be something ofthe sort.
Yeah, I'm not still.
If it is still.
I'm not sure if it's stilloperative or not that would be.
Erica Friis (28:28):
So it's like a strength, strength in numbers
kind of situation cool wow okay,sorry I got us like wildly off
track, but that was reallyinteresting about the bill.
Okay, maxwell, yeah, okay, backto the trauma and drama of
Maxwell.
So it sees, the developmentplan at this point has this you
know the facades are going to belooking very with the
(28:51):
neighborhood it has to take upthe issue to the circuit court
ruling.
Zak Leonard (28:54):
Okay, so now we kind of jump forward a year to
last december, slash january ofthis year, and what the
developers, right they now haveto kind of provide their final
(29:16):
development yeah, so they've hada year away.
And that has to agree with thepreliminary one that they
submitted.
That largely justified the zonechange.
Uh-huh, and in the fall of 24,they come back with something
that really looks nothing likewhat they had submitted.
All the architectural detailingat least the substantial parts
(29:38):
of it have been reduced oromitted.
The massing has changed.
The townhouses where there areseparate entries, were largely
obliterated on Stone Ave, soit's really just a cheapening of
the whole affair.
Erica Friis (29:54):
There's really no other way to describe it Like a
bait and switch.
Can we say that?
Zak Leonard (29:58):
It has been said yes, yes, yeah.
Erica Friis (30:00):
It has been said.
It has been said, yes, yes,yeah, it has been said, and it's
just you know.
Zak Leonard (30:05):
So people on the technical review committee and
the subdivision committee, youknow they express concerns, they
say this is not what we weresold on.
Erica Friis (30:13):
Yeah.
Zak Leonard (30:14):
It's by, you know, a different architect.
It turns out that thepreliminary design was not
actually linked to any floorplans, so it was kind of just an
artistic representation.
Erica Friis (30:27):
But there was no sense of whether this could be
built If it was feasible or not,for that spot yeah.
Zak Leonard (30:34):
And okay, well, now I'll just keep going, just go
Great.
And listeners out there.
This is also in my op-eds,which are available in the blog
section of the Bluegrass Trustwebsite.
So all the windows have justbeen replications of the same
type when they were supposed toface stone ave.
(30:55):
Well, apparently we can't buildthem anymore because we have to
put a utility easement alongstone ave because, remember, I
had said before that thedeveloper would be blowing up
part of hagerman court well thatpart of hagerman court is lined
with utility pools.
(31:16):
No one had considered what wouldhappen to those utility pools
yeah, but you're you'redeveloping like shouldn't this?
Erica Friis (31:21):
why wouldn't this be a part of the preliminary
like?
Zak Leonard (31:25):
it is for the zoning ordinance it is and
planning staff.
It should have figured that out.
It specifically says forpreliminary development plans
you have to show where existingor new proposed easements will
lie on the plan.
Erica Friis (31:40):
Yeah.
Zak Leonard (31:41):
And they just didn't do that, and then come
back and say well, we can'tbuild this complex.
Erica Friis (31:46):
We can't build what we promised you we could build
because of an oversight that weshould have looked at to begin
with.
Yeah, okay.
Zak Leonard (31:54):
So, yeah, I think we then go through four new
plans just to get back tosomething that approximates the
renderings that we were shown in2023.
And we eventually get there.
I mean, there are still thingslike the townhouses and the step
backs that are not going to bebuilt, but that's enough to
satisfy the planning commissionthat the final plans are in
(32:18):
substantial conformity with thepreliminary ones.
Erica Friis (32:21):
What is exactly?
Zak Leonard (32:22):
Just the massing the building the cladding things
of that sort.
Erica Friis (32:26):
But not with the cool windows, the variation of
windows or anything like that.
Zak Leonard (32:29):
So some got put back in.
Okay, Again, back in October2023, and anyone can go back to
the hearings and see thisthemselves the builder's
representative from Gilbane, whowas a firm that really creates
these student housing complexesall over the country, these big
box kind of cheaply lookingclass things.
Erica Friis (32:51):
No character yeah.
Zak Leonard (32:51):
They said oh well, we had to change all the windows
because in the initial drawingsthey didn't reflect to floor
plans.
We had to figure out where thebedrooms and the bathrooms were.
Well, apparently that's not anissue anymore because they,
after substantial pushback fromthe planning commission, were
able to vary the window size andshape.
So it just seems that I don'tknow the builders.
(33:13):
The developers are just tryingto cut corners where they can
and hope that nobody notices.
Thankfully we had, you know, anarchitect in the planning
commission that really tookissue with this and they
responded to his complaints.
But if he hadn't been there,you know.
Erica Friis (33:28):
Right, it could have just like passed and no one
would have.
I mean so there's only onearchitect on this planning
commission.
Zak Leonard (33:34):
Not anymore.
He resigned from thatcommission.
Erica Friis (33:37):
Oh no, Because of this project, you think.
Zak Leonard (33:39):
I don't know.
I don't think it's because ofthis project.
You think I?
Erica Friis (33:41):
don't know.
I don't think it's because ofthis project.
Okay, gotcha, it's probably.
I hear the planning commissionit's like it's a tough gig is
what I hear.
I mean, there's a lot ofcontentious, you know stuff on
both sides.
You have a lot of people whoyou know, but there has to be a
certain profession or a certainlike member from different
fields on the commission, right?
So you have to have thereshould be, but there often isn't
(34:02):
.
Zak Leonard (34:02):
Certainly on the Historic Preservation Commission
, seats are not filled withspecific people with particular
expertise in the way that theyshould be.
Erica Friis (34:10):
Yeah, so that stinks.
I mean, what do you think isthe?
Because if you go to thewebsite because I have before
I've gone and I'm like, oh, letme look at the historic
preservation oh, there should besomebody who has a law
background, that makes totalsense.
There should be somebody withan architecture background, you
know somebody like.
So I guess there's just it'sit's not a paid position and
(34:30):
therefore I mean it's likealmost volunteer based or what
is the reasoning behind that?
You think?
Zak Leonard (34:35):
All I know is that when I have gone before the
historic preservation commissionfor things like National
Register nomination approvals,They've maybe had seven members
out of 15 turn up.
And why that is is beyond mypowers Of knowing.
Yeah, sure.
Erica Friis (34:51):
Yeah, interesting.
Okay, so is that where we're atright now?
With Maxwell?
There's been a back and forth,but there's slowly been an
architect that was on theplanning commission.
Ensure that there's somecharacter that's being inserted
back into this project, and sois it still in limbo, or where
are we at?
Zak Leonard (35:10):
As of a few weeks ago, it has been fully approved.
Erica Friis (35:15):
Okay, yeah, so the renderings are out there as to
what the final like, what it forsure, will look like.
Yes, okay, and so when do theybreak ground?
Zak Leonard (35:25):
That's a question.
I mean, a lot of thosebuildings are still inhabited by
students, so I imagine notbefore the end of the academic
year.
Erica Friis (35:36):
Sure Leases run out .
Sure Leases run out, yeah.
Zak Leonard (35:38):
But there's a lot of work just involving the
parcel itself in terms ofgrading, reorienting the roads.
It's going to be a verydisruptive affair.
To Maxwell, which is a majorartery for did the traffic
studies.
But there will be a single.
(36:00):
Hagerman will still be.
It'll be.
It's one way coming down to thenew building and then two ways
between Stone Ave and theparking garage.
But you have 165 spots and agood number of them are going to
be turning right to go ontoMaxwell.
That stretch between whereHagerman will hit Stone Ave and
Maxwell is probably all of fivecars long.
(36:21):
There is no traffic light there.
I can only imagine what thebackups there will be.
Erica Friis (36:26):
Well, it makes you wonder how yeah, I mean like how
in-depth was this traffic study?
Like there's just one personout there with like a clipboard,
like it looks fine, no problem.
Zak Leonard (36:37):
That's the impression I got.
I mean, maybe the study itselfexists somewhere out there in
the ether, but I just can't.
I mean, Stone Ab itself isalready such a.
It's a very skinny road withparking allowed on it, and I
think it's just going to be anightmare for anybody living
there.
Erica Friis (36:56):
It sounds like this project is one of many, that
this is sort of a broader trendin Lexington.
How and in what ways can we asthe public get more involved
with helping the trust or otherentities that are out there on
the ground, trying to makevoices more heard in the name of
historic preservation?
Zak Leonard (37:17):
Well, I would say you know we put out as much
information as we can and atleast in issues in Lexington
dealing with substantialprojects and rezonings.
You know we participate inpublic comment.
We go before the PlanetCommission for the hearings, so
you know.
Sign up for our emails.
Follow us on social media.
Erica Friis (37:38):
Or become a trust member Become a trust member.
Yes, for sure, I think that'sthe greatest way to to stay very
informed with I mean, you guyshave a great newsletter, really
great events and ways to enjoyhistoric preservation, with
detours once a month, the firston wednesday of every month, but
yeah, and staying in tune toyour fabulous social media,
which you are the one writing.
Zak Leonard (37:59):
Yeah, indeed yeah and you.
Every so often we do put op-edsin the Herald-Leader, but they
only really let you put an op-edonce every three months.
So there are other ways to stayinformed about these projects.
I mean, it is very difficult asjust someone in the community
to know what's going on, becauseyou basically need to go on the
(38:21):
Acela platform and then youhave to find the project and you
have to click through the tabsto see if they have uploaded
documents and whatnot.
And the planning department hashad a tendency of late to you
know they can approve, they candisapprove or they can state
that they want to postpone Tableit, table it In things like the
Max Bowl.
They've kind of been switchingtheir opinions at the 11th hour.
(38:43):
And again, this is only publicinformation so far as you can
access the documents on theAcela platform.
Erica Friis (38:49):
Yeah.
Zak Leonard (38:50):
So just keeping track of everything that's going
on can be rather arduous.
Erica Friis (38:54):
I'm sure you get lost in the weeds because unless
you really already know whatyou're doing and what you're
looking for, it's not front pagenews essentially.
Well that's why it's importantto definitely stay in tune to
organizations like the BluegrassTrust and make sure that you're
following their social media.
Zak Leonard (39:10):
And we are trying to kind of develop a new and
more, I would say, assertiveapproach to advocacy too.
I've just been able to form anew policy and research
committee within the trust thathas.
You know, academics, lawyers,policy people to you know, talk
about things like expanding ourdemolition delays, how, you know
(39:30):
, we can kind of optimize thefunctions of the historic
preservation commission.
How do we, you know, introducezoning amendments if that's the
thing we want to do?
So you know we are trying to betrying to get ahead of these
projects.
Erica Friis (39:43):
Proactive is the word for it, definitely.
I love that you want to hear.
Something really dumb of me isthat we should have talked about
you at the beginning of thisepisode.
Me yes, little old me.
So forgive me that we're goingto introduce you.
This is very avant-garde.
I guess you could say Not thetypical, but tell us about your
(40:04):
background in historicpreservation and how you came to
even be at the Bluegrass Trust.
Zak Leonard (40:08):
I came to be at the Bluegrass Trust because I was
hired.
Erica Friis (40:12):
You're not originally from Lexington, right
.
Zak Leonard (40:14):
No, you said North, I'm from Boston.
Erica Friis (40:17):
Originally I didn't know that.
Yeah, oh, very cool.
Zak Leonard (40:22):
Then I was.
Erica Friis (40:23):
Can you turn a Boston accent off and on when
you need?
Zak Leonard (40:26):
to.
I'm dying out, and I'm from thesuburbs Gotcha.
My father has a lingeringCambridge accent, but even that
is rare these days, oh nice.
I did my PhD at the Universityof Chicago and then I taught
there for a few years as ateaching fellow.
Erica Friis (40:40):
Where was your bachelor's and master's at?
Zak Leonard (40:42):
I did my bachelor's at Brown and then I did my
first master's at the Universityof Edinburgh.
Erica Friis (40:47):
Oh my God, Hell yeah.
Zak Leonard (40:49):
But then after my teaching fellowship for various
job market related reasons, Isaid, well, let's pivot to
preservation, because I'd alwaysbeen interested in preservation
and had done some kind ofcoursework in my undergrad years
and an internship.
So then I went back to schoolat Cornell and I got my master's
in preservation planning.
Erica Friis (41:06):
Very cool.
Yeah, cornell has a greatpreservation program right, one
of the maybe only ones thatactually offers a PhD in
preservation.
Zak Leonard (41:14):
Yeah, and I mean, I think it's different at UK.
Our preservation program atCornell lives in the city and
regional planning department.
Very cool, we have a number ofCornell alums working at UK whom
you may already know?
Erica Friis (41:30):
Yeah, definitely, yes, I do.
Yeah, one is on my master'scommittee, actually, two, two
One is my master's chair.
That's great, good people,those Cornell folk, yeah, so I
mean my job trajectory doesn'treally.
Zak Leonard (41:43):
It doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense
coming from.
I was doing.
British imperial history andSouth Asian history.
That's what my first book is on.
Erica Friis (41:50):
Amazing.
Zak Leonard (41:51):
But in one of the chapters in that book is deals
with infrastructure in SouthAsia, which really kind of got
me more focused on the builtenvironments.
So there are corollaries.
Erica Friis (42:01):
Yeah, of course, I love a non-traditional
background too.
I think that it often lendsitself very nicely to like.
It means, wherever you end up,you're looking at things from
different angles that are, Ithink, really important.
I've always been.
I've been a fan of yours for awhile in terms of I think you
handle a National RegisterCommittee very well whenever you
, like you know, go up and likenominate properties here in
(42:22):
Lexington.
I think you do a really nicejob with that.
Zak Leonard (42:24):
Yeah, we just got the Louis Gart Malt.
Erica Friis (42:26):
House.
Yeah, tell us a little bitabout that.
Zak Leonard (42:29):
Oh, love that Malt, house.
Erica Friis (42:32):
What is a Malt House?
Zak Leonard (42:32):
We have to start with that Malt House is
essentially where you processthe malt that is used in brewing
.
And this building is located onNorth Limestone, kind of at the
intersection of North Limestoneand York.
The original portion dates toaround the 1850s and then there
is an 1880s addition and thenthe part facing North Limestone
(42:54):
which has a very fanciful kindof poured concrete design facade
is a 1920s extension.
Kind of poured concrete designfacade is 1920s extension.
But the original 1850s portionwas functioned as a hemp house,
was adaptively reused in thelate 1860s to become a malt
house and was the core of theLouis Gart family's business
(43:15):
empire.
And they were extremelyprominent Germans in Lexington.
Joseph Louis Gart, like manyimmigrants in the brewery
industry, had trained inCincinnati before roaming the
Midwest and coming to Lexingtonand he had the foresight to
really make use of the BeltlineRailway which still parts of it
(43:37):
still run through that sectionof town and so he would ship his
processed malt out all overreally southern region of
America.
So that's yeah, that was quitean intriguing project to work on
.
Erica Friis (43:50):
I'm sure.
Zak Leonard (43:51):
And I am now in the final stages of completing my
nomination for the Mantell House.
Erica Friis (43:57):
Oh, fantastic, good for you, you know about that
guy.
A little bit.
Yeah, I love Mantell ingeneralel in general.
Zak Leonard (44:03):
yeah, yeah, that whole area the mentel house
dates to 1840s, parts of it atleast.
Uh, one of kind of three orfour houses in the entire
northern section of richmondroad.
Um, you probably don't want toget me too wound up about the
mentel house, but it was alsothe site of the ashland park
stud farm.
This was bj tracy's operation,which was the one of the most
(44:27):
famous trotting horse breedingenterprises in the world.
He shipped his horses outhawaii, australia.
Um so yeah, learning a lottrotting horses has been
something.
Erica Friis (44:38):
Sure, yeah, I'm, I bet, yeah it's.
And there I mean that's when Ihear all the different types,
because you just, we just thinkthoroughbreds generally, and
then it's like, oh my gosh,there's saddlebreds right and
trotting, and like the amountsof different horses that do
different things is prettyastounding don't ask me about
anything aside from trottinghorses, you're just the expert
(44:59):
on trotting.
Uh yeah, I'll tell you aboutWoodlake Farm near Frankfort.
Zak Leonard (45:03):
I'll tell you about .
Erica Friis (45:03):
Fairlawn Farm, but that's where the buck stops, so
how long have you been inLexington then?
Zak Leonard (45:12):
Oh man, I got here July of 23.
Erica Friis (45:15):
23.
Okay, and so I mean, you'veobviously lived all over.
You've been in Scotland, you'vebeen in Boston, You've been in
Chicago.
How does Lexington fare?
Do you enjoy living inLexington?
Zak Leonard (45:26):
I do.
It's a very diverting placewith a very special and unique
history, and I had never been toKentucky before I had really
packed up my car and drove.
Erica Friis (45:38):
To drive to Lexington, wow, okay.
Zak Leonard (45:40):
Sight unseen, had really packed up my car and
drove to drive to lexington, wow, okay, um, sight unseen.
But I've been, you know,importing some of my friends
from the east coast and chicagoand everyone is, you know, they
just don't really have a animpression of kentucky yeah but
they're always very delightedand surprised by what they find
here so you're bringing peoplein to move here, not to move
just to visit.
Just to visit okay, to boostour tourism and economy, as you
(46:00):
should, very good um, but thereI mean for someone doing
historic preservation.
There's just so much ground forme to cover, because again, we
don't just work in lexington andwe, you know, deal with the
surrounding counties too yeah Iwas just in winchester on monday
night before the administrativeboard to advocate for the
survival of Allen Chapel there,which was a colored Methodist
(46:23):
Episcopal church from 1898.
So yeah, we make the rounds.
Erica Friis (46:28):
Yeah, we often forget how much the trust's
reach is.
Yeah, it's definitely a centralKentucky thing A whole
bluegrass, that's very cool.
So I want to to ask you this,which I like asking guests at
the very end too, on yourtypical night out in lexington
where are you going, what areyou doing, what are you eating?
Oh man um like what's yourfavorite restaurant, maybe
(46:50):
favorite drink or, if you're nota drinker, coffee so I am
delighted that lexington has arobust nightlife.
Zak Leonard (46:58):
Uh, I will say, I'll just give you a list of
some of my listen favoriteplaces.
Of course, ona, you can't.
Of course you know.
Yes, how can?
What is better than a six,seven dollar negroni?
Erica Friis (47:10):
on thursday night, or a boat drink with my favorite
hipsters my favorite have youbeen to trifecta?
I have, I like trifecta.
Yes, I like it a lot too andthe speakeasy right the glass
blowing yes yes, very good.
Yep, there's just where do Ibegin?
Zak Leonard (47:25):
mere twin and mere twin.
Erica Friis (47:26):
Very good now you're talking my language.
I love uh.
Zak Leonard (47:28):
Warehouse block and we have you know a bunch of
stuff down around.
You know where limestone meetsloudon too for sure that's
really my neighborhood, that'swhere I live on brand, so I love
check us out.
Erica Friis (47:39):
I love Loudon house and such a beautiful, beautiful
situation there.
Cool, all right.
Well, thanks for so much forbeing a part of this episode.
I think I learned a lot.
Zak Leonard (47:48):
Yeah, I hope I didn't overload.
Erica Friis (47:51):
No, not at all.
Zak Leonard (47:51):
The listeners on arcane zoning regulations?
No, not at all.
Erica Friis (47:56):
No no, I think it's good for us to know, it's good
for the public, myself included,to be more in tune to what's
happening in Lexington.
I just wish it wasn't so.
I don't know, it just needs tobe demystified more.
Zak Leonard (48:10):
Yeah, it's tough, that's the perfect way to put it
.
Yeah, all right, cool.
Erica Friis (48:15):
Well, thanks again, dr Leonard.
Thank you Big thanks again toour special guest, dr Zach
Leonard of the Bluegrass Trust,for joining us on this very
special episode.
If you're just as concernedabout how development is
affecting historic properties inLexington, then the best way to
stay informed and get involvedis to pay attention to and
(48:36):
support the work of theBluegrass Trust.
And if you didn't know muchabout it, the Bluegrass Trust is
a nonprofit organization thathas worked tirelessly since 1955
, beginning when they savedHopemont from demolition and
helped establish Lexington'sfirst historic district.
For over seven decades, theyhave preserved iconic sites and
(48:56):
structures like the Mary ToddLincoln House, shaker Town,
dudley House, pope Villa and,most recently, the Dr Thomas
Hunt Morgan House, among many,many others, all while serving
as Central Kentucky's premierresource for protecting our
architectural heritage.
So here's how you can getinvolved.
You could visit their websiteat bluegrasstrustorg to become a
(49:17):
member, a volunteer, or donate,or just follow them on social
media for regular updates onhistoric preservation issues,
events, tours and, of course,opportunities for advocacy.
They are Bluegrass Trust on allsocials.
The more voices we haveadvocating for thoughtful
development that still respectsour architectural heritage, the
(49:40):
stronger our community becomes.
Remember our history matters,our neighborhoods matter, and
your voice matters in shapingLexington's future while still
honoring its past.
The Lexington Podcast isproduced by Erica Freese and
Jonathan O'Hare in associationwith Freese Media.
If you wanted to get a hold ofus, feel free to email us at
lexingtonpodcast at gmailcom orfollow us on Instagram.
(50:02):
We are Lexington Podcast onInstagram as well, and we will
see you next week.
Welcome to a very special episode of the Lexington
podcast called Preserving OurPast, where we're going to
explore the sometimes dramaticintersection of progress and
preservation.
We've got a fascinating episodefor you about a development
saga that has been unfoldingright here in Lexington over the
past two years, and we'rethrilled to welcome Dr Zach
(00:22):
Leonard, historic PreservationManager of the Bluegrass Trust,
who's going to break down allthe ongoing drama surrounding
the Maxwell Street DevelopmentProject, you know the one where
a six-story student apartmentcomplex is set to replace
several historic homes near UK'scampus.
Dr Leonard is going to walk usthrough Lexington's development
process and explain somethingthat might surprise you how
(00:45):
houses that are centuries oldand listed on the National
Register of Historic Places canstill somehow get demolished.
We'll also discuss a concerningnew state bill that could
potentially limit public inputon what happens in our historic
neighborhoods.
And if you're wondering whatyou can do to ensure your
neighborhood's voice is heard byour, let's say, evolving city
(01:09):
council, dr Leonard has someactionable advice for you as
well.
So grab your coffee, settle in,let's dive into this eye-opening
conversation about the past,present and future of
Lexington's historic landscape.
Don't go anywhere.
Don't go anywhere.
(01:51):
Glad you're here, y'all.
Okay, hi, I am back with DrZach Leonard of the Bluegrass
Trust.
Super kind to be able to joinme today to talk about what we
have in emails dubbed theMaxwell drama and trauma.
So hi, dr Leonard, how are you?
Zak Leonard (02:06):
Doing well.
Thank you for having me.
Erica Friis (02:08):
Thank you so much.
I was so excited to have youover because you're actually
only like my second or thirdpodcast guest ever, at least in
this room that we're in rightnow.
So I know I cleaned up for you,wanted to make sure that
everything looked all right.
And I'm super excited to haveyou over because the Bluegrass
Trust is something that's supernear and dear to my heart and I
(02:28):
want to hear about what's goingon lately with the Maxwell
Project, so to speak.
So I know you've been heavilyinvolved in it.
You've been going to councilmeetings about it.
You've written in the HeraldLeader op-ed pieces Very well
written, by the way.
I love your writing style.
I thank you, Of course.
So why don't you, for ourlisteners who don't know about
the Maxwell Project how it'sdefinitely a point of contention
(02:49):
in regards to historicpreservation here in Lexington
tell us about it?
Zak Leonard (02:53):
All right.
Well, this is a rather involvedsaga that involves analyzing
comp plans, zoning changes andwhatnot, but I will try to
simplify it for your audience.
Essentially, I have beeninvolved in really challenging
(03:13):
this project since October 2023,my how the time flies.
So the area we are talkingabout is really East Maxwell and
then Stone Avenue.
This encompasses 13 propertiesthat are listed on the National
Register, the early of whichdates to 1885.
(03:37):
Most of them are kind of lateVictorian, some, you know, early
colonial revival examples, andwhen these were built, these
houses were single familyhousing.
They were residences for quiteillustrious faculty members at
the University of Kentucky,congressional representatives,
and they have, admittedly,suffered neglect really since
(04:02):
the 80s, and it was around thattime that they came under kind
of the ownership of a single LLCwho then rented them out to
students.
Erica Friis (04:12):
Okay, so it's like student housing.
Zak Leonard (04:13):
It is student housing now and I think there
are kind of some social welfarelike recovery programs in some
of the houses too.
Based on my conversations withstudents just on the street,
these buildings essentially dofunction as affordable housing,
certainly more so than thestudio and one bedroom
(04:34):
apartments that will be going intheir place, and we can only
guess at how much the rentalrates on those will be.
Erica Friis (04:41):
Oh, I can't imagine .
Yeah, so the overall goal wasthat some.
So it was an LLC for severalhouses and then somebody has
come in and bought those houses.
Now a developer from DublinOhio.
Dublin, ohio, okay, so not evenin Kentucky, no.
And then that developer hasdecided to tear down these
(05:04):
houses and built a four or fivestory apartment complex.
Zak Leonard (05:09):
Six story fronting Maxwell, potentially seven story
in the rear, although they havenever produced any elevation
drawings of that.
But it's Maxwell kind of itslopes down going towards high
street.
So there's variation in thetopography.
Erica Friis (05:25):
Okay.
Zak Leonard (05:35):
And then it will step down to about three stories
on Lexington.
Yeah as to, you know reallywhat the role of the city is to
ensure that this new housingcompliments and really
harmonizes with the existinghistoric buildings that surround
it.
Erica Friis (05:53):
Which is the Aylesford district.
Is that right?
Okay, aylesford was AylesfordOkay.
Zak Leonard (05:58):
I say Aylesford.
Erica Friis (05:59):
No, you're probably right.
Zak Leonard (06:00):
That's my northern accent.
Erica Friis (06:01):
No, I love it.
Zak Leonard (06:02):
I always mispronounce things in the city.
I love it pronounce things inthe city.
Uh, to ellsford I and this.
I'm happy you brought that upbecause ellsford has been a
local historic district underkind of the purview of the city
since 1996 and this project areaof which I am speaking was
initially supposed to beincluded in that historic
district.
(06:22):
Um, the guy that owned it atthe time and this is from what I
have heard slash discovered inour records basically said that
he would tank the entiredesignation of the entire
district if this section,including the houses he owned,
was included in it, and that'swhy okay it.
These buildings are notprotected oh, no, no.
Erica Friis (06:43):
So for our listeners, tell us if you're a
house in part of an older partof Lexington, what makes you
designated as being protected ornot protected?
Let's say, what does thatprocess look like?
Zak Leonard (06:59):
So really there are two levels of designation one
that entails protection on thelocal level and one that doesn't
.
So you can be in a nationalregister district or
individually listed, which givesyou certain advantages if you
want, to say, pursue historictax credits for rehabilitations.
But you can blow up a house inthe national register and no one
(07:21):
is going to come stop you.
This is kind of a commonmisconception.
And then you also have what wecall H1 overlays in the city.
They are generally referred toas local historic districts.
They often encompass NationalRegister districts, but in the
case of what we're seeing herein Maxwell, the local historic
district Aylesford is smallerthan the greater National
(07:44):
Register district, which Ibelieve is called the greater
National Register District,which I believe is called the
Southeastern Commercial HistoricDistrict or something like that
.
Erica Friis (07:50):
Okay so they the guy who had owned it did not
want those to be a part ofAylesford.
Yes, okay.
So this is it's like a weirdloophole of sorts, because they
are totally historic houses, yes, and within historic districts
to some capacity, but not on thelet's say like for sure, let's
save them, kind of thing.
Zak Leonard (08:11):
Yeah, so the city really has no jurisdiction over
what happens to these houses.
If they were, you know, twoblocks East past, uh Rose, they
would be protected.
And if you were to alter themin any substantial way besides
you know normal wear and tearrepair you would need to get a
(08:33):
certificate of appropriatenessfrom city.
Okay, and then if there was anykind of controversy, it would
go before the board ofarchitectural review.
Erica Friis (08:41):
So that was my next question was so the city of
Lexington still had to pass orallow this developer to tear
down those houses in the firstplace?
Or like, even beyond just therebeing historic protections,
doesn't Lexington, the cityitself, get to say what is built
and what like?
The developer has to go throughsome red tape with the city of
(09:02):
Lexington.
Zak Leonard (09:02):
Yeah, and it's complicated.
Every case is different.
In this particular instance,the developer needed a zone
change from r4 uh, which thesebuildings currently were zoned
as, and in r4 you know they,there are open space minimums,
there are vegetation minimums.
The building can only take upso much of the parcel.
(09:24):
Developer got it rezoned to b2a, which is supposed to be
reserved for kind of the coredowntown area, and this was the
crux of our debate before theplanet commission, which was
what is downtown where is that?
okay, yeah, yeah if we can see acertain mural or a building,
are we downtown, downtown, sure,and the conclusion was that
(09:45):
downtown is just a verysubjective category.
Erica Friis (09:48):
Yeah, oh, I'm sure, and Lexington is so unique in
the sense that our downtown isso close to the university and
so I'm sure there's a lot oflike overlap.
That's in this like gray areatoo, Because this is, you know,
quote unquote student housingvery close to UK.
But is that considered downtownor not?
Zak Leonard (10:12):
Yeah, and if you read the zoning ordinance it's
pretty clear that B2A should bereserved for what people would
consider to be kind of the maindrag where, like you know, the
nightlife, the entertainmentthings of that sort are located,
not in a historicallyresidential neighbor, Gotcha.
Erica Friis (10:23):
So the developer puts up the plan for this new
apartment building, and thenwhat happens?
Zak Leonard (10:31):
Well, because they wanted to get the zone changed,
they had to submit a preliminarydevelopment plan, which then
makes its way up through thetechnical committee, subdivision
committee to the planningcommission.
Erica Friis (10:44):
Okay.
Zak Leonard (10:45):
And that's where the Blue Grass Trust really
became, I think.
Erica Friis (10:49):
Took notice.
Zak Leonard (10:52):
In a kind of a public capacity.
Before the planning commission,we had published stories about
the affected buildings, theirhistories, their architecture,
and that's on our social mediapages.
Do you run the social mediapages?
We also.
Erica Friis (11:06):
Do you run the social media pages for the
Bluegrass Trust?
Zak Leonard (11:09):
I produce a lot of content.
Erica Friis (11:10):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, no, I love it.
Zak Leonard (11:12):
Anything that involves a, you know, a deep
dive into a building is probablymy work.
Erica Friis (11:16):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's very well done.
By the way, yeah, you're sowelcome.
Sorry, I didn't mean tointerrupt.
I was I.
I think it's great forlisteners to know that that is
such a phenomenal resource foranybody who's interested in
Lexington history.
Zak Leonard (11:28):
But also, you've been chronicling this situation
to like yeah, and I mean oursocial media really functions
these days to advance oureducation objectives, because
many of the buildings that Ifeature have not been properly
inventoried.
They might have Bluegrass Trustplaques.
On Fridays I like to do aForgotten Friday feature that
(11:48):
feels, you know, just demolishedbuildings that no longer exist.
But this and again, withoutgoing on a tangent, the Kentucky
State Historic Inventory ofthese resources in most cases
has not been updated since 1979,1980.
Oh, wow.
So this is kind of theBluegrass Trust's contribution
to updating the information andsharing these stories Absolutely
(12:09):
More widely.
Yes, yes, but aside from doingthose social media posts, I also
set up this petition that gotjust about 3,000 signatures,
opposing the rezoning and theredevelopment opposing the
rezoning and the redevelopmentand a lot of the there was, you
know, talk about the reason why,like, well, who cares?
Erica Friis (12:29):
It's just shitty student housing, right, Was that
pretty much the like for youraverage person that is not a
developer?
Was that that side Like whywould someone not want to sign
this and not want to supportsaving these houses?
Zak Leonard (12:42):
That was certainly the rationale that the lawyer
for the developers gave us.
Erica Friis (12:48):
So much.
Zak Leonard (12:49):
So the example I gave of, you know, a possible
adapter for use was actually theKimball House Square
development which is on SouthLimestone.
Erica Friis (13:00):
Yeah, where they're connected in the back with
glass.
Yeah, were there, connected inthe back with glass.
Zak Leonard (13:04):
Yes, A bunch of kind of late Italian Romanesque
buildings that formerly servedas the Kimball House Hotel.
Fun story once upon a time,apparently, there was a monkey
house in the back that you couldvisit A monkey house, a monkey
house, yeah, okay, in the backof South Limestone.
Houses.
Erica Friis (13:19):
Like several monkeys, yeah monkeys.
Zak Leonard (13:22):
Where did these monkeys come from?
Erica Friis (13:24):
We don't know.
I think they might have beenlab monkeys, but don't quote me
oh gotcha okay, this is deephistory here well, you know,
I've just done a huge deep diveinto um the narco farm.
So I wonder if there's somesort of like link that I just
think everything's linked tonarco, like I just have it in my
head.
So maybe there was lab monkeysat narco, but okay, go on, sorry
(13:44):
.
Exactly, it's not that farfetched.
Zak Leonard (13:49):
Crazier things have happened.
Erica Friis (13:49):
Crazier things have happened.
Zak Leonard (13:51):
But essentially, yeah, those buildings were
rehabbed and they were unitedwith a whole block of new
construction in the rear.
And that is something that theMaxwell parcel could have
accommodated is new constructionbehind the historic properties.
But that was kind of shot downout of hand by the developers,
(14:11):
probably because it would havebeen more expensive, even though
those the houses on Maxwellwould be eligible for state and
federal historic tax credits 20%of qualified rehab expenses.
They also made some kind ofdinky argument that because the
Kimball House Square developmenthad happened, it happened
really during the recession, Ibelieve, and the developer there
(14:33):
there were some financialissues but that was because of
the recession, not because ofthe feasibility of the building
project.
Erica Friis (14:41):
Yeah, that is a dinky argument.
Zak Leonard (14:43):
Dinky.
Yeah, I don't like that at allyeah, that's pretty lame and but
now I mean I can't.
I can't imagine those houses onlimestone not existing there
totally and again, those are ina national register.
Erica Friis (14:56):
Yeah, district as well, and it's just one of my
favorite stretches of lexingtonlike and it's such a major
stretch between campus anddowntown and I thoroughly look
forward to it.
I think it connects that littlecorridor so nicely and I just
can't imagine those houses notbeing there.
It's such a great, greatexample of adaptive reuse.
(15:17):
And to your point, too, about Idon't think our average
listener, maybe the averageLexingtonian, really knows that
there's so much good to adaptivereuse in regards to, like, what
developers can do in terms oftax credits, right.
So why isn't that enough?
I guess kind of the classicquestion in historic
preservation might be why isn'tthat enough for developers to
(15:39):
want to adaptively reusesomething instead of tearing
something to the ground andrebuilding themselves?
I mean, it's not as simple asthat.
I know it's always complicated.
It's certainly going to bedifferent for each and every
project, but why do you thinkdevelopers are so quick to be
like, no, we're not going tothink about rehabbing this.
Zak Leonard (15:57):
I think and this is maybe just speculation, but in
the case of the Maxwell parcel,they were just thinking about
how many units they could squashinto it, and I think it's about
700 beds with 165 or so parkingspaces within the building.
Erica Friis (16:15):
So it's just like simple math money, money, money.
Zak Leonard (16:17):
Yeah, got it, got it.
Yeah, no-transcript employeeworking in the planning
(16:43):
department.
If you're a developer and theonly thing you have in your mind
are these density targets thatare calculated with some
algorithm that you know we meremortals are not privy to, that's
only one facet of planning thatcompletely trumps, or rather
excludes, how people interactwith their built environment,
how these communities such asEllsford will function with just
(17:05):
a seven, six, seven storybuilding plop down in the middle
.
I mean, it's not even theconstruction, the building.
they're gonna be blowing up halfa Hagerman court and
redirecting it onto Stone Aveyeah and up until you know, a
few weeks ago, the developerswanted that segment to be a
private with a public easement,and thankfully the city said no,
(17:26):
you can't really do that, yeah,yeah yeah, um, can't just
colonize the neighborhoodcompletely you don't own it,
yeah, okay.
Erica Friis (17:34):
So then, okay, what ?
What happened next with withthis situation?
Like so we're at the pointwhere they have come with plans,
right, and then the city hassaid what?
Zak Leonard (17:46):
So the Planning Commission and this was back in
late 2023, approved the rezoningto B2A, and that was contingent
on the developers abiding bythe final development plan and
the renders of the building thatthey had submitted.
Okay, so what did the rendersof the building that they had
submitted?
Erica Friis (18:04):
Okay, so what did the renders look like?
Zak Leonard (18:07):
Oh, there were various versions.
Erica Friis (18:10):
Okay.
Zak Leonard (18:12):
The final development plan render at that
time, had it had step backs fromStone Ave and the planning
staff and the developer's lawyerat the time may emphasize the
necessity of those step backscreating these townhouse units
that were about two stories talland would kind of blend in more
(18:34):
seamlessly with the otherhouses on Stone Ave.
Erica Friis (18:36):
Okay, so the facades are going to look fairly
historic.
Zak Leonard (18:40):
Yeah, that's how it was sold at least, and there
was a variety of claddingmaterials window shapes,
fenestrations but they reallyemphasized at the time kind of
activating this ground space andhaving a quote unquote front
porch feel.
Erica Friis (19:00):
Okay.
Okay, because there's otherhouses in the area that also
have kind of a front porch yeahthey're bungalow types, right?
Yeah, so to speak, or not notquite, because it's 1800s, right
late, yeah, they're I meanreally two mostly two-story
brick homes, the various stylesand ornamentation.
Zak Leonard (19:17):
Some are bungalows, more on stone app than on
Maxwell Okay, but the Maxwellhouses are I mean, some of them
are actually of a decent size.
So how they would havefunctioned in the earlier 20th
century is that, you know, youwould have had your permanent
residence but they would havelet out certain rooms to borders
.
Erica Friis (19:34):
Okay, cool.
So they come up with this finalplan.
And it was approved byLexington.
Yes, and then what?
And it was approved byLexington.
Zak Leonard (19:39):
Yes, and then what?
So we were then agitating forthe council, the city council,
to review the planningcommission's decision, because
they have the ability to do that.
And this opened a whole othercan of worms, because the city
council, in a split vote,decided just to approve the
(20:03):
rezoning, without any furtherpublic comment.
Erica Friis (20:06):
This is the council from last year.
Okay.
Zak Leonard (20:09):
Yeah.
Erica Friis (20:09):
Which was a very interesting council, I think in
general.
I mean, it was a.
Several of them did not get I'msaying this you're not, but
several you know there's been alot it was a.
It was a huge shakeup of whowas on that last year and it was
definitely a kind of a shakeupof who was back and who's not
back this year, and that was a.
I'm speaking specifically onthe.
(20:31):
They also approved to expandthe urban growth boundary.
So this was a council that waspretty big about like let's just
do a lot.
Zak Leonard (20:38):
Don't you think?
Yeah, I mean in this particularcase and you know anyone can go
back and watch the videos ofthese hearings on the government
website but there seemed to bea contention amongst the council
members as to what the purviewof their power really was.
There were some that said, ohwell, we shouldn't review any
planning commission decisionsthat get a unanimous vote.
(21:01):
And there are others saying,well, the planning commission
are not elected representatives,we are, and if we are granting
some people an appeal and therewere other cases that same day
about rezonings that got theirappeals heard we should kind of
grant them across the board.
Erica Friis (21:16):
How do you feel about that?
Zak Leonard (21:18):
It was disappointing because I believe
it was the council member forDistrict 3, where the project is
based, who voted, who reallymotioned to approve the rezoning
and didn't give any explanationof that decision making.
And, kind of to add insult toinjury, the modus operandi, so
(21:39):
to speak, of the council memberswas not to receive any
correspondence or communicationfrom their constituents
involving rezonings.
Erica Friis (21:48):
Why.
Zak Leonard (21:49):
Because they claim and again I submitted an open
records request we have thisfrom their aides in which they
say the council members mayserve in a quasi-judicial
function when they areevaluating the zone changes and
any testimony or correspondencefrom constituents might kind of
prejudice at a time.
Erica Friis (22:08):
Oh, interesting Wow .
Zak Leonard (22:09):
So and the takeaway from this was and I think this
is in the third op-ed I wrotewas that council members, you
know, in issues involving ofgreat magnitude, such as
rezonings that affect entireneighborhoods, may never have a
chance to hear directly from thepeople they're supposed to be
representing.
And you know, we can talk aboutthe comp plans too, but once we
(22:31):
didn't get that hearing beforethe council, we then filed a
suit to get the case consideredbefore the circuit court because
we really had no other option.
Yeah, you're back into yeah andthe judge at the circuit court,
basically, you know, confirmedthat cities, city agencies, when
(22:54):
they are dealing with planning,do not have to really implement
every aspect of a comp plan,because that would just be
unmanageable and to a degreethat makes sense.
But if it's permissible just tofocus on the density goals and
exclude everything in the compplans that has to do with
historic preservation andcompatible design, where does
(23:15):
that leave us?
Erica Friis (23:15):
Right, yeah, golly.
So it's like it's so much morecomplicated than I think meets
the eye and there's so manyplayers involved.
I think that's what's kind ofoverwhelming about it too.
You would think, like in anyfacet of government, there
should be a lot of like checksand balances along the way, and
it seems as though some thingsget that and some things don't.
Zak Leonard (23:36):
Well, I think the trend that is kind of
disconcerting to me is thecity's unwillingness to really
bring in the public and treattheir opinions seriously.
You know, even when the councilwas debating reviewing the
planning commission's decision,certain council members had
acknowledged that there was alot of hostility towards this
(23:57):
project from the community.
People had been airing theirgrievances, but they were
willing to disregard that publicinput as just noise or loudness
.
And this is, you know, thisdisinclination to hear from
Lexingtonians about theneighborhoods they inhabit.
Also, it extends to otherplanning issues too, and this
(24:18):
might be a good opportunity totalk about House Bill 443.
Do you know much about that?
No, please tell me about HouseBill 443.
Erica Friis (24:22):
Do you know much about that?
No, please tell me.
House Bill 443?
Yeah, it is coming.
Zak Leonard (24:26):
It has been approved, so it is now law,
section 100.275 of the KRS andthis new piece of legislation.
Again the city is going to haveto change its zoning ordinance
in the way it does things toreally meet these objectives
that are being put forth at thestate level.
Is that basically planningdecisions involving development
(24:49):
plans and subdivision plots andall that?
They have to adhere toobjective standards and be
approved ministerially.
That is the language.
What does ministerially mean?
Basically, by theadministration, without
substantial exercise ofdiscretion okay, so it's.
Erica Friis (25:08):
That's essentially a box ticking exercise and what
will be in the box well thatit's.
Zak Leonard (25:16):
This new piece of legislation has probably under
100 words to it.
So it is oh wow yeah, um, andthere are carve-outs that are
themselves extremely vague.
But the takeaway here seems tobe that while preliminary
development plans will go beforethe planning commission, final
(25:38):
development plans will not.
So the developer can submitsomething and then, you know, a
year on, might have to deal withLester committees subdivision
committee, technical reviewcommittee but there won't be
another kind of public hearingon the project.
Erica Friis (25:55):
So this is really good for developers and terrible
for historic preservation.
Zak Leonard (25:59):
Yeah, I mean.
It just makes it very difficultfor the public to air their
views.
Erica Friis (26:05):
Yeah, which obviously is already a problem.
Zak Leonard (26:08):
Yeah, and I mean there are.
From what we've heard, cityplanning staff have been
reaching out to developers aboutthings like this legislation to
get on the same page.
Same for the new downtownmaster plan that's in the works
but you know no one's contactedus for input yeah no one's
(26:29):
contacted the neighborhoodassociations for input.
It just seems to be thisdealing between the city and the
developer community that I meangross, like how is this allowed
to?
Erica Friis (26:43):
it seems like where did this come from?
Like why now?
And why they're just trying tostreamline this process to make
it both easier and less noisefor the process of development.
Zak Leonard (26:55):
That seems to be the way it looks.
Erica Friis (26:57):
Okay, wow.
So what can we as the publicand in the historic preservation
community, those that arepassionate about I don't know
everything from ourneighborhoods to having a voice
about our neighborhoods, whatcan we do to, I guess, lobby
against this, or what do you seeas the best course of action to
take?
Zak Leonard (27:25):
Because a lot of, at least concerning the bill,
the law now that I justmentioned, it's still up in the
air and the city doesn't evenreally know how it's going to
have to alter its codes.
But more generally, I would sayI think the neighborhood
associations still have anamount of power.
I think in many cases theirranks just need to be
replenished with new membershipand the neighborhood
associations would benefit fromcoordinating their efforts more
with one another.
Everything's a bit balkanizedright now.
(27:48):
In some cases it's evendifficult to figure out who is
supposed to be chairing aneighborhood association.
So again, we do have a crop ofnew council members who, I
imagine, would be very willingand, you know, amenable to
hearing from the neighborhoodassociations.
They might just not have thebackground and preservation,
(28:09):
understand the necessity of it,and that's fine, you know.
That's why we exist too is tospread that knowledge Totally.
We are trying.
Erica Friis (28:15):
Yes, yes, so the?
Is there an overarchingneighborhood associate, like
where they all come together, Iwonder?
Zak Leonard (28:23):
There, the?
Is there an overarchingneighborhood associate, like
where they all come together?
I wonder?
There used to be something ofthe sort.
Yeah, I'm not still.
If it is still.
I'm not sure if it's stilloperative or not that would be.
Erica Friis (28:28):
So it's like a strength, strength in numbers
kind of situation cool wow okay,sorry I got us like wildly off
track, but that was reallyinteresting about the bill.
Okay, maxwell, yeah, okay, backto the trauma and drama of
Maxwell.
So it sees, the developmentplan at this point has this you
know the facades are going to belooking very with the
(28:51):
neighborhood it has to take upthe issue to the circuit court
ruling.
Zak Leonard (28:54):
Okay, so now we kind of jump forward a year to
last december, slash january ofthis year, and what the
developers, right they now haveto kind of provide their final
(29:16):
development yeah, so they've hada year away.
And that has to agree with thepreliminary one that they
submitted.
That largely justified the zonechange.
Uh-huh, and in the fall of 24,they come back with something
that really looks nothing likewhat they had submitted.
All the architectural detailingat least the substantial parts
(29:38):
of it have been reduced oromitted.
The massing has changed.
The townhouses where there areseparate entries, were largely
obliterated on Stone Ave, soit's really just a cheapening of
the whole affair.
Erica Friis (29:54):
There's really no other way to describe it Like a
bait and switch.
Can we say that?
Zak Leonard (29:58):
It has been said yes, yes, yeah.
Erica Friis (30:00):
It has been said.
It has been said, yes, yes,yeah, it has been said, and it's
just you know.
Zak Leonard (30:05):
So people on the technical review committee and
the subdivision committee, youknow they express concerns, they
say this is not what we weresold on.
Erica Friis (30:13):
Yeah.
Zak Leonard (30:14):
It's by, you know, a different architect.
It turns out that thepreliminary design was not
actually linked to any floorplans, so it was kind of just an
artistic representation.
Erica Friis (30:27):
But there was no sense of whether this could be
built If it was feasible or not,for that spot yeah.
Zak Leonard (30:34):
And okay, well, now I'll just keep going, just go
Great.
And listeners out there.
This is also in my op-eds,which are available in the blog
section of the Bluegrass Trustwebsite.
So all the windows have justbeen replications of the same
type when they were supposed toface stone ave.
(30:55):
Well, apparently we can't buildthem anymore because we have to
put a utility easement alongstone ave because, remember, I
had said before that thedeveloper would be blowing up
part of hagerman court well thatpart of hagerman court is lined
with utility pools.
(31:16):
No one had considered what wouldhappen to those utility pools
yeah, but you're you'redeveloping like shouldn't this?
Erica Friis (31:21):
why wouldn't this be a part of the preliminary
like?
Zak Leonard (31:25):
it is for the zoning ordinance it is and
planning staff.
It should have figured that out.
It specifically says forpreliminary development plans
you have to show where existingor new proposed easements will
lie on the plan.
Erica Friis (31:40):
Yeah.
Zak Leonard (31:41):
And they just didn't do that, and then come
back and say well, we can'tbuild this complex.
Erica Friis (31:46):
We can't build what we promised you we could build
because of an oversight that weshould have looked at to begin
with.
Yeah, okay.
Zak Leonard (31:54):
So, yeah, I think we then go through four new
plans just to get back tosomething that approximates the
renderings that we were shown in2023.
And we eventually get there.
I mean, there are still thingslike the townhouses and the step
backs that are not going to bebuilt, but that's enough to
satisfy the planning commissionthat the final plans are in
(32:18):
substantial conformity with thepreliminary ones.
Erica Friis (32:21):
What is exactly?
Zak Leonard (32:22):
Just the massing the building the cladding things
of that sort.
Erica Friis (32:26):
But not with the cool windows, the variation of
windows or anything like that.
Zak Leonard (32:29):
So some got put back in.
Okay, Again, back in October2023, and anyone can go back to
the hearings and see thisthemselves the builder's
representative from Gilbane, whowas a firm that really creates
these student housing complexesall over the country, these big
box kind of cheaply lookingclass things.
Erica Friis (32:51):
No character yeah.
Zak Leonard (32:51):
They said oh well, we had to change all the windows
because in the initial drawingsthey didn't reflect to floor
plans.
We had to figure out where thebedrooms and the bathrooms were.
Well, apparently that's not anissue anymore because they,
after substantial pushback fromthe planning commission, were
able to vary the window size andshape.
So it just seems that I don'tknow the builders.
(33:13):
The developers are just tryingto cut corners where they can
and hope that nobody notices.
Thankfully we had, you know, anarchitect in the planning
commission that really tookissue with this and they
responded to his complaints.
But if he hadn't been there,you know.
Erica Friis (33:28):
Right, it could have just like passed and no one
would have.
I mean so there's only onearchitect on this planning
commission.
Zak Leonard (33:34):
Not anymore.
He resigned from thatcommission.
Erica Friis (33:37):
Oh no, Because of this project, you think.
Zak Leonard (33:39):
I don't know.
I don't think it's because ofthis project.
You think I?
Erica Friis (33:41):
don't know.
I don't think it's because ofthis project.
Okay, gotcha, it's probably.
I hear the planning commissionit's like it's a tough gig is
what I hear.
I mean, there's a lot ofcontentious, you know stuff on
both sides.
You have a lot of people whoyou know, but there has to be a
certain profession or a certainlike member from different
fields on the commission, right?
So you have to have thereshould be, but there often isn't
(34:02):
.
Zak Leonard (34:02):
Certainly on the Historic Preservation Commission
, seats are not filled withspecific people with particular
expertise in the way that theyshould be.
Erica Friis (34:10):
Yeah, so that stinks.
I mean, what do you think isthe?
Because if you go to thewebsite because I have before
I've gone and I'm like, oh, letme look at the historic
preservation oh, there should besomebody who has a law
background, that makes totalsense.
There should be somebody withan architecture background, you
know somebody like.
So I guess there's just it'sit's not a paid position and
(34:30):
therefore I mean it's likealmost volunteer based or what
is the reasoning behind that?
You think?
Zak Leonard (34:35):
All I know is that when I have gone before the
historic preservation commissionfor things like National
Register nomination approvals,They've maybe had seven members
out of 15 turn up.
And why that is is beyond mypowers Of knowing.
Yeah, sure.
Erica Friis (34:51):
Yeah, interesting.
Okay, so is that where we're atright now?
With Maxwell?
There's been a back and forth,but there's slowly been an
architect that was on theplanning commission.
Ensure that there's somecharacter that's being inserted
back into this project, and sois it still in limbo, or where
are we at?
Zak Leonard (35:10):
As of a few weeks ago, it has been fully approved.
Erica Friis (35:15):
Okay, yeah, so the renderings are out there as to
what the final like, what it forsure, will look like.
Yes, okay, and so when do theybreak ground?
Zak Leonard (35:25):
That's a question.
I mean, a lot of thosebuildings are still inhabited by
students, so I imagine notbefore the end of the academic
year.
Erica Friis (35:36):
Sure Leases run out .
Sure Leases run out, yeah.
Zak Leonard (35:38):
But there's a lot of work just involving the
parcel itself in terms ofgrading, reorienting the roads.
It's going to be a verydisruptive affair.
To Maxwell, which is a majorartery for did the traffic
studies.
But there will be a single.
(36:00):
Hagerman will still be.
It'll be.
It's one way coming down to thenew building and then two ways
between Stone Ave and theparking garage.
But you have 165 spots and agood number of them are going to
be turning right to go ontoMaxwell.
That stretch between whereHagerman will hit Stone Ave and
Maxwell is probably all of fivecars long.
(36:21):
There is no traffic light there.
I can only imagine what thebackups there will be.
Erica Friis (36:26):
Well, it makes you wonder how yeah, I mean like how
in-depth was this traffic study?
Like there's just one personout there with like a clipboard,
like it looks fine, no problem.
Zak Leonard (36:37):
That's the impression I got.
I mean, maybe the study itselfexists somewhere out there in
the ether, but I just can't.
I mean, Stone Ab itself isalready such a.
It's a very skinny road withparking allowed on it, and I
think it's just going to be anightmare for anybody living
there.
Erica Friis (36:56):
It sounds like this project is one of many, that
this is sort of a broader trendin Lexington.
How and in what ways can we asthe public get more involved
with helping the trust or otherentities that are out there on
the ground, trying to makevoices more heard in the name of
historic preservation?
Zak Leonard (37:17):
Well, I would say you know we put out as much
information as we can and atleast in issues in Lexington
dealing with substantialprojects and rezonings.
You know we participate inpublic comment.
We go before the PlanetCommission for the hearings, so
you know.
Sign up for our emails.
Follow us on social media.
Erica Friis (37:38):
Or become a trust member Become a trust member.
Yes, for sure, I think that'sthe greatest way to to stay very
informed with I mean, you guyshave a great newsletter, really
great events and ways to enjoyhistoric preservation, with
detours once a month, the firston wednesday of every month, but
yeah, and staying in tune toyour fabulous social media,
which you are the one writing.
Zak Leonard (37:59):
Yeah, indeed yeah and you.
Every so often we do put op-edsin the Herald-Leader, but they
only really let you put an op-edonce every three months.
So there are other ways to stayinformed about these projects.
I mean, it is very difficult asjust someone in the community
to know what's going on, becauseyou basically need to go on the
(38:21):
Acela platform and then youhave to find the project and you
have to click through the tabsto see if they have uploaded
documents and whatnot.
And the planning department hashad a tendency of late to you
know they can approve, they candisapprove or they can state
that they want to postpone Tableit, table it In things like the
Max Bowl.
They've kind of been switchingtheir opinions at the 11th hour.
(38:43):
And again, this is only publicinformation so far as you can
access the documents on theAcela platform.
Erica Friis (38:49):
Yeah.
Zak Leonard (38:50):
So just keeping track of everything that's going
on can be rather arduous.
Erica Friis (38:54):
I'm sure you get lost in the weeds because unless
you really already know whatyou're doing and what you're
looking for, it's not front pagenews essentially.
Well that's why it's importantto definitely stay in tune to
organizations like the BluegrassTrust and make sure that you're
following their social media.
Zak Leonard (39:10):
And we are trying to kind of develop a new and
more, I would say, assertiveapproach to advocacy too.
I've just been able to form anew policy and research
committee within the trust thathas.
You know, academics, lawyers,policy people to you know, talk
about things like expanding ourdemolition delays, how, you know
(39:30):
, we can kind of optimize thefunctions of the historic
preservation commission.
How do we, you know, introducezoning amendments if that's the
thing we want to do?
So you know we are trying to betrying to get ahead of these
projects.
Erica Friis (39:43):
Proactive is the word for it, definitely.
I love that you want to hear.
Something really dumb of me isthat we should have talked about
you at the beginning of thisepisode.
Me yes, little old me.
So forgive me that we're goingto introduce you.
This is very avant-garde.
I guess you could say Not thetypical, but tell us about your
(40:04):
background in historicpreservation and how you came to
even be at the Bluegrass Trust.
Zak Leonard (40:08):
I came to be at the Bluegrass Trust because I was
hired.
Erica Friis (40:12):
You're not originally from Lexington, right
.
Zak Leonard (40:14):
No, you said North, I'm from Boston.
Erica Friis (40:17):
Originally I didn't know that.
Yeah, oh, very cool.
Zak Leonard (40:22):
Then I was.
Erica Friis (40:23):
Can you turn a Boston accent off and on when
you need?
Zak Leonard (40:26):
to.
I'm dying out, and I'm from thesuburbs Gotcha.
My father has a lingeringCambridge accent, but even that
is rare these days, oh nice.
I did my PhD at the Universityof Chicago and then I taught
there for a few years as ateaching fellow.
Erica Friis (40:40):
Where was your bachelor's and master's at?
Zak Leonard (40:42):
I did my bachelor's at Brown and then I did my
first master's at the Universityof Edinburgh.
Erica Friis (40:47):
Oh my God, Hell yeah.
Zak Leonard (40:49):
But then after my teaching fellowship for various
job market related reasons, Isaid, well, let's pivot to
preservation, because I'd alwaysbeen interested in preservation
and had done some kind ofcoursework in my undergrad years
and an internship.
So then I went back to schoolat Cornell and I got my master's
in preservation planning.
Erica Friis (41:06):
Very cool.
Yeah, cornell has a greatpreservation program right, one
of the maybe only ones thatactually offers a PhD in
preservation.
Zak Leonard (41:14):
Yeah, and I mean, I think it's different at UK.
Our preservation program atCornell lives in the city and
regional planning department.
Very cool, we have a number ofCornell alums working at UK whom
you may already know?
Erica Friis (41:30):
Yeah, definitely, yes, I do.
Yeah, one is on my master'scommittee, actually, two, two
One is my master's chair.
That's great, good people,those Cornell folk, yeah, so I
mean my job trajectory doesn'treally.
Zak Leonard (41:43):
It doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense
coming from.
I was doing.
British imperial history andSouth Asian history.
That's what my first book is on.
Erica Friis (41:50):
Amazing.
Zak Leonard (41:51):
But in one of the chapters in that book is deals
with infrastructure in SouthAsia, which really kind of got
me more focused on the builtenvironments.
So there are corollaries.
Erica Friis (42:01):
Yeah, of course, I love a non-traditional
background too.
I think that it often lendsitself very nicely to like.
It means, wherever you end up,you're looking at things from
different angles that are, Ithink, really important.
I've always been.
I've been a fan of yours for awhile in terms of I think you
handle a National RegisterCommittee very well whenever you
, like you know, go up and likenominate properties here in
(42:22):
Lexington.
I think you do a really nicejob with that.
Zak Leonard (42:24):
Yeah, we just got the Louis Gart Malt.
Erica Friis (42:26):
House.
Yeah, tell us a little bitabout that.
Zak Leonard (42:29):
Oh, love that Malt, house.
Erica Friis (42:32):
What is a Malt House?
Zak Leonard (42:32):
We have to start with that Malt House is
essentially where you processthe malt that is used in brewing
.
And this building is located onNorth Limestone, kind of at the
intersection of North Limestoneand York.
The original portion dates toaround the 1850s and then there
is an 1880s addition and thenthe part facing North Limestone
(42:54):
which has a very fanciful kindof poured concrete design facade
is a 1920s extension.
Kind of poured concrete designfacade is 1920s extension.
But the original 1850s portionwas functioned as a hemp house,
was adaptively reused in thelate 1860s to become a malt
house and was the core of theLouis Gart family's business
(43:15):
empire.
And they were extremelyprominent Germans in Lexington.
Joseph Louis Gart, like manyimmigrants in the brewery
industry, had trained inCincinnati before roaming the
Midwest and coming to Lexingtonand he had the foresight to
really make use of the BeltlineRailway which still parts of it
(43:37):
still run through that sectionof town and so he would ship his
processed malt out all overreally southern region of
America.
So that's yeah, that was quitean intriguing project to work on
.
Erica Friis (43:50):
I'm sure.
Zak Leonard (43:51):
And I am now in the final stages of completing my
nomination for the Mantell House.
Erica Friis (43:57):
Oh, fantastic, good for you, you know about that
guy.
A little bit.
Yeah, I love Mantell ingeneralel in general.
Zak Leonard (44:03):
yeah, yeah, that whole area the mentel house
dates to 1840s, parts of it atleast.
Uh, one of kind of three orfour houses in the entire
northern section of richmondroad.
Um, you probably don't want toget me too wound up about the
mentel house, but it was alsothe site of the ashland park
stud farm.
This was bj tracy's operation,which was the one of the most
(44:27):
famous trotting horse breedingenterprises in the world.
He shipped his horses outhawaii, australia.
Um so yeah, learning a lottrotting horses has been
something.
Erica Friis (44:38):
Sure, yeah, I'm, I bet, yeah it's.
And there I mean that's when Ihear all the different types,
because you just, we just thinkthoroughbreds generally, and
then it's like, oh my gosh,there's saddlebreds right and
trotting, and like the amountsof different horses that do
different things is prettyastounding don't ask me about
anything aside from trottinghorses, you're just the expert
(44:59):
on trotting.
Uh yeah, I'll tell you aboutWoodlake Farm near Frankfort.
Zak Leonard (45:03):
I'll tell you about .
Erica Friis (45:03):
Fairlawn Farm, but that's where the buck stops, so
how long have you been inLexington then?
Zak Leonard (45:12):
Oh man, I got here July of 23.
Erica Friis (45:15):
23.
Okay, and so I mean, you'veobviously lived all over.
You've been in Scotland, you'vebeen in Boston, You've been in
Chicago.
How does Lexington fare?
Do you enjoy living inLexington?
Zak Leonard (45:26):
I do.
It's a very diverting placewith a very special and unique
history, and I had never been toKentucky before I had really
packed up my car and drove.
Erica Friis (45:38):
To drive to Lexington, wow, okay.
Zak Leonard (45:40):
Sight unseen, had really packed up my car and
drove to drive to lexington, wow, okay, um, sight unseen.
But I've been, you know,importing some of my friends
from the east coast and chicagoand everyone is, you know, they
just don't really have a animpression of kentucky yeah but
they're always very delightedand surprised by what they find
here so you're bringing peoplein to move here, not to move
just to visit.
Just to visit okay, to boostour tourism and economy, as you
(46:00):
should, very good um, but thereI mean for someone doing
historic preservation.
There's just so much ground forme to cover, because again, we
don't just work in lexington andwe, you know, deal with the
surrounding counties too yeah Iwas just in winchester on monday
night before the administrativeboard to advocate for the
survival of Allen Chapel there,which was a colored Methodist
(46:23):
Episcopal church from 1898.
So yeah, we make the rounds.
Erica Friis (46:28):
Yeah, we often forget how much the trust's
reach is.
Yeah, it's definitely a centralKentucky thing A whole
bluegrass, that's very cool.
So I want to to ask you this,which I like asking guests at
the very end too, on yourtypical night out in lexington
where are you going, what areyou doing, what are you eating?
Oh man um like what's yourfavorite restaurant, maybe
(46:50):
favorite drink or, if you're nota drinker, coffee so I am
delighted that lexington has arobust nightlife.
Zak Leonard (46:58):
Uh, I will say, I'll just give you a list of
some of my listen favoriteplaces.
Of course, ona, you can't.
Of course you know.
Yes, how can?
What is better than a six,seven dollar negroni?
Erica Friis (47:10):
on thursday night, or a boat drink with my favorite
hipsters my favorite have youbeen to trifecta?
I have, I like trifecta.
Yes, I like it a lot too andthe speakeasy right the glass
blowing yes yes, very good.
Yep, there's just where do Ibegin?
Zak Leonard (47:25):
mere twin and mere twin.
Erica Friis (47:26):
Very good now you're talking my language.
I love uh.
Zak Leonard (47:28):
Warehouse block and we have you know a bunch of
stuff down around.
You know where limestone meetsloudon too for sure that's
really my neighborhood, that'swhere I live on brand, so I love
check us out.
Erica Friis (47:39):
I love Loudon house and such a beautiful, beautiful
situation there.
Cool, all right.
Well, thanks for so much forbeing a part of this episode.
I think I learned a lot.
Zak Leonard (47:48):
Yeah, I hope I didn't overload.
Erica Friis (47:51):
No, not at all.
Zak Leonard (47:51):
The listeners on arcane zoning regulations?
No, not at all.
Erica Friis (47:56):
No no, I think it's good for us to know, it's good
for the public, myself included,to be more in tune to what's
happening in Lexington.
I just wish it wasn't so.
I don't know, it just needs tobe demystified more.
Zak Leonard (48:10):
Yeah, it's tough, that's the perfect way to put it
.
Yeah, all right, cool.
Erica Friis (48:15):
Well, thanks again, dr Leonard.
Thank you Big thanks again toour special guest, dr Zach
Leonard of the Bluegrass Trust,for joining us on this very
special episode.
If you're just as concernedabout how development is
affecting historic properties inLexington, then the best way to
stay informed and get involvedis to pay attention to and
(48:36):
support the work of theBluegrass Trust.
And if you didn't know muchabout it, the Bluegrass Trust is
a nonprofit organization thathas worked tirelessly since 1955
, beginning when they savedHopemont from demolition and
helped establish Lexington'sfirst historic district.
For over seven decades, theyhave preserved iconic sites and
(48:56):
structures like the Mary ToddLincoln House, shaker Town,
dudley House, pope Villa and,most recently, the Dr Thomas
Hunt Morgan House, among many,many others, all while serving
as Central Kentucky's premierresource for protecting our
architectural heritage.
So here's how you can getinvolved.
You could visit their websiteat bluegrasstrustorg to become a
(49:17):
member, a volunteer, or donate,or just follow them on social
media for regular updates onhistoric preservation issues,
events, tours and, of course,opportunities for advocacy.
They are Bluegrass Trust on allsocials.
The more voices we haveadvocating for thoughtful
development that still respectsour architectural heritage, the
(49:40):
stronger our community becomes.
Remember our history matters,our neighborhoods matter, and
your voice matters in shapingLexington's future while still
honoring its past.
The Lexington Podcast isproduced by Erica Freese and
Jonathan O'Hare in associationwith Freese Media.
If you wanted to get a hold ofus, feel free to email us at
lexingtonpodcast at gmailcom orfollow us on Instagram.
(50:02):
We are Lexington Podcast onInstagram as well, and we will
see you next week.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com