My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Summary 2012 03 13
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Study Sessions
>
2012 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Summary 2012 03 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:49:08 AM
Creation date
6/8/2012 2:03:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Supplemental fields
Test
SSSUM 2012 03 13
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
City Council <br />Study Session Summary <br />March 13, 2012 <br />Page 4of 7 <br />review the structural components of the house as well as what it would take to <br />bring the exterior back to its original state. <br />Councilmember Jasiak inquired as to how homeowners could participate in the <br />historic survey of Jefferson Place Subdivision. The response was that there <br />would be an opportunity for citizen input to respond to details on the home <br />regarding exterior, dates of construction, architectural types. <br />Councilmember Loo and Dalton were curious about the maps presented on <br />historic downtown and could they be made available on the website. The <br />response was that these maps are not 100% accurate, but council members felt <br />they still provided good information. Councilmember Dalton suggested including <br />a disclaimer with the map indicating they are not 100% accurate. <br />Mayor Muckle suggested a plaque for landmarked homes to include the miner, <br />suggested a website that would be interactive to allow the homeowner the <br />opportunity to log-in and give added historic information, and to also have the <br />locations be compatible with GIS. <br />Councilmember Dalton said he still was having trouble viewing a 50 year old <br />house as historic –was hoping a possible outcome of the survey would identify <br />structures that are unique. <br />Demolition Review: <br />Planning DirectorRuss facilitated a discussion on the refinement of the <br />demolition process and the five (5) key talking points which are: <br />Changing the permit process from one that has timelines governed by the <br />International Building Code (IBC) to an application process that has <br />timelines specified by the Louisville Municipal Code (LMC); <br />Establishing criteria the applicant is required to meet as a part of the <br />demolition application; <br />Outlining the time frame to which the approval of demolition application is <br />valid; <br />Eligibility of previously expired demolition permits, and <br />Clarifying the definition of a “wall” to specifically include “windows and <br />doors” in the definition. <br />Director Russ asked City Council if they wanted to have further discussion with <br />the HPC at a study session before coming to Council with the revised Ordinance. <br />Council offeredsuggestions of ways to improve the revision to the <br />ordinance/demo process, and some of those suggestions are below: <br />Remove the six requirements of what needs to accompany a demo permit. <br />Unhappy about all the stuff an applicant has to bring to apply. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.