Laserfiche WebLink
DRAFT <br />A detailed process should be provided on how a specific property can be excluded <br /> <br /> <br />from a ‘district’ designation. <br />The 50-year old age designation for a property is not appropriate. <br /> <br /> <br />There is a need for consideration of accessibility and energy conservation along with <br /> <br /> <br />Historic Preservation. <br /> <br />McDermott: <br />The use of the word ‘ significant’ is not a measurable criteria. It is too subjective. <br /> <br /> <br />The Ordinance does not address the membership of the Preservation Commission. <br /> <br /> <br />Muth clarified that membership is established by the Louisville City Charter. <br /> <br />Pritchard: <br />The Ordinance is detrimental to downtown Louisville. <br /> <br /> <br />What properties have a National Designation and how will this Ordinance effect <br /> <br /> <br />them? Are they all commercial or are some of the residential? <br />How did the Commission determine the 180-day time frame for a stay of demolition? <br /> <br /> <br />How long is the process for determination? <br /> <br /> <br />Muth identified the following properties: 1616 Front, 1024 Grant, 1116 Lafarge, 700 Lincoln, <br />700 Main, 801 Main, 1001 Main, 1016 Main, 1124 Main, 1006 Pine, 301 Spruce, and the Grain <br />Elevator on County Rd., as meeting criteria for National Designation. <br /> <br />Hartronft explained that the 180-day waiting period is a typical designation in the Historic <br />Preservation field. He also stated that the normal process could take 6-8 months for an historic <br />designation to be established for a specific property. <br /> <br />Deborski: no additional questions or comments. <br /> <br />Public Hearing Closed Commission Comments: <br /> <br />Loo: <br />The Ordinance is too vague and uses fuzzy language. <br /> <br /> <br />Sees the potential for abuse. <br /> <br /> <br />Concerned that there had not been coordination with the Comprehensive Plan <br /> <br /> <br />process. <br />Incentives should be reviewed by the City Attorney. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />McDermott: <br />Funding has to be in place before final adoption. <br /> <br /> <br />A demolition permit is a good idea but the 3-year waiting term is excessive. <br /> <br /> <br />There is a need for an Historic Preservation Ordinance but not in this form and not <br /> <br /> <br />without funding. <br /> <br />Kalish: <br />Values historic preservation and recognizes the need for it in the City. <br /> <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />