Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 18, 2012 <br />Page 4 of 10 <br />McCartney stated staff did not currently have the information but it could be made <br />available for next meeting. <br />Lewis stated there are probably more examples out there and didn’t believe the <br />architecture is all that amazing but thought the social history is worthy of a second look. <br />Watson stated the asbestos siding creates health issues if it were to be retained and <br />any modification to this structure would change the form. Therefore he does not believe <br />this structure is worthy of staying. <br />La Grave addressed the criteria. He stated the social history is not incredibly strong <br />and he agreed with Watson regarding the retention of the asbestos siding. He added <br />he did not believe this structure was worthy of a stay. <br />Lewis gave some insight on the Louisville Heights area, which is where this structure is <br />located. She added this house does not necessarily add to a potential district but is not <br />sure if this sways her interest in placing a stay. <br />Stewart added his comments toward contributions to a district and stated he did not <br />believe it did. He then added there are other criteria we need to follow. He concluded <br />by stating the applicant already has created plan sets for the expansion of this structure <br />and therefore is obviously not interested in placing a stay on this structure. <br />Lewis recommended the HPC establish a motion for everyone to vote on. She then <br />made a motion to release the permit for demolition, based on the fact the structure has <br />significant costs for renovation or repair, not architecturally significance and it is not <br />eligible for inclusion in a historic district. <br />La Grave seconded the motion. <br />Koertje recommended a friendly amendment to strike the statement that this structure <br />could have significant costs because we don’t know. <br />Lewis stated it was purely based on the cost to remove the siding. <br />Stewart recommended it be removed from the motion. <br />La Grave agreed. <br />Name Vote <br />Mike KoertjeNo <br />Heather LewisYes <br />