My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2011 09 12
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2011 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2011 09 12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:15 PM
Creation date
9/13/2011 8:31:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2011 09 12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
APPENDIX B <br />REVIEW CRITERIA <br />Applications that demonstrate the following will be preferred and have a greaterchance of <br />favorable review, although it is not necessary for all applications to satisfy all of these criteria. <br />1. Foster Rehabilitation of Resource <br />Applicants will be judged on how strong the effort to return the resource to its historic <br />appearance and how well proper and professional preservation techniques will be applied. <br />2. Demonstrate Preservation Necessity or Threat <br />A project that demonstrates a strong need for funding because of an existing or future <br />action or condition that may adversely affect the existing architectural or historic interest in the <br />property will receive extra consideration for funding. This may include the need for significant <br />repair due to neglect. <br />3. Demonstrate Resource Significance <br />Proposals to rehabilitate resources with high resource significance will be given greater <br />weight over those proposals with lower resource value. Resources with high significance include <br />those that are: <br />•Listed on the National, State or Louisville Registers of Historic Places. <br />•Eligible for listing as an individual landmark. <br />•Eligible for listing as a contributing building in a historic district and has architectural <br />integrity. <br />4. Matching Funds <br />Applications which demonstrate the availability of matching funds will be preferred, <br />though matching funds are not an absolute requirement. <br />5. Character-Producing Resources <br />Applications which retain or rehabilitate resources which contribute toward the historic <br />character of Historic Old Town Louisville, even if those resources are not eligible for historic <br />landmarking, may be given favorable review. <br />Page 7of 19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.