My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2013 05 20
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2013 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2013 05 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:09:16 PM
Creation date
5/29/2013 11:33:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2013 05 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />April 15, 2013 <br />Page 5 of 7 <br /> <br />Koertje stated he would remove the redlines of the draft language and provide it to staff <br />for review and action. <br />Discussion – Comprehensive Plan Cultural Heritage Section <br />Stewart asked staff what were the next steps on this item. <br />McCartney recommended the HPC members should attend the City Council meeting to <br />give their thoughts. <br />Stewart referred to the draft language and had a few modifications. <br />Watson asked about the maintenance requirement on landmark structures and stated it <br />is very direct to require a landmark owner to be required to maintain their landmark. <br />Koertje stated there is a municipal code which covers this statement currently in the <br />Louisville Municipal Code. <br />Committee Reports – <br />Outreach committee - none <br />Commercial incentives workshop - none <br />LRC liaison <br />Koertje stated he hasn’t received much response. <br />Update on Demolition Requests - 1041 Grant, 701 Walnut, 939 Lincoln, 721 Front <br />Stewart stated he appreciates staff’s updates on these projects. <br />Update on Alteration Certificates – 612 Grant <br />Stewart stated this sounded like a pretty straight forward request. <br />Discussion/Comments on Planning Department Referrals – <br />Coal Creek Station PUD <br />Stewart stated the staff report had emphasis on the train cars. He asked staff to give a <br />rundown of what a staff referral is. <br />McCartney stated a referral is a request for a review body to provide comments on how <br />they feel a PUD affects their interest. He added staff has reached out to train <br />enthusiasts to see if someone might be interested in acquiring the trains because the <br />applicants do not want to keep them.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.