Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 04 27

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes March 16, 2015 Page 3 of 11 Public Hearing - Grain Elevator- Demolition of Shed, Landmark, Alteration Certificate Watson asked if there was any conflict. None was disclosed. Trice presented the information from staff's report. She stated the project is to demo the shed, landmark the elevator and request an alteration certificate for additions to the west and east side of the elevator. She presented photos from a recent site visit. Trice presented the following: Demo of the Shed - Trice stated a subcommittee reviewed the demo permit and believed a public hearing was necessary. She stated the condition of the shed was poor. She recommends release of the demolition permit Grain Elevator Landmarking — Trice stated the Grain Elevator is very significant to the establishment of the City of Louisville, is architecturally significant because it was designed by a prominent architect, and is socially significant because it represents the agricultural lifestyle of Louisville. Staff recommends approval of the landmarking. Alteration Certificate — Trice stated the alteration certificate is to permit additions to the west and east elevation. She believes the additions are sensitive and further contribute to the eligibility of the Grain Elevator. She recommends approval of the request. Koertje asked if the alteration would affect the eligibility to remain on the National Register. Trice stated there aren't any criteria for the eligibility and believes the additions will not detract from the landmarking. Fahey asked why the HPC is reviewing the landmark again if the HPC already recommended the Grain Elevator to be approved for a landmark at the PUD level. Trice stated she believes it doesn't hurt to do the landmarking again. Fasick asked if there was more history of the structure. Trice stated there was a more detailed history done for the grant and it has been included in this report. Stewart stated the major stalling points of the landmarking were because the boundary of the property had not been determined. Erik Hartronft, applicant, presented. He gave the following details of the project: • Bring back the original scales • The western addition is a port cochere. The port cochere is considered a reconstruction since it was previously on the structure and the other additions (on