Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />December 5, 2007 <br />Page 2 of 12 <br /> <br />Given the above information, the applicant submitted a demolition permit on October 25, <br />2007 for the demolition of 820, 836, and 844 Main Street. Subcommittee members <br />McMenamin and Lewis toured the site on November 2, 2007 and determined that 820 <br />Main Street has had too many alterations over time to qualify for individual landmark <br />status. However, members of the subcommittee determined that all buildings at 836 and <br />844 Main Street are eligible for local land marking due to both the social significance of <br />the sites and the remaining architectural integrity. A stay was placed on the demolition <br />permit request for 836 and 844 Main Street and a public hearing scheduled for <br />December 5. The demolition request for 820 Main Street was approved. <br /> <br />The public hearing was advertised in the Daily Camera on November 20, 2 <br /> <br /> <br />Muth reminded the Commission that they could vote to either release the demo <br />permit or hold the permit for the remainder of the 180-day period. In is case, the 180- <br />day period will expire on April 22, 2008. In that 180-day period the Co mission and <br />applicant may work to find an alternative to demolition. If no alternative found by April <br />22, the applicant is then free to demolish the buildings. <br /> <br />Lewis asked for the applicant presentation. <br /> <br /> <br />Andrew Muller, 4770 Baseline Road, Suite 200, er, stated that they have no <br />current plans for the site. They merely wanted e discussion of what the future <br />of the site is and what is or is not historically import stated that he and his <br />partners only want to add to the downtown commun nd help make it a vibrant area. <br />He said he sees a similar density at the corner of the property of 844 regardless of the <br />new uses. He reiterated that they are no specific plans for the site and that he wants to <br />discuss all of the options before pro g. <br /> <br />Lewis opened the public hearing up t <br /> <br /> <br />tions from the public. <br /> <br />Joan Riggins, 805 Ospre~ stated her feeling that the fabric of downtown is being <br />lost and she doesn't wan this corner turn into another red brick building that looks <br />like all the others. She ad t Louisville is continually ranked as one of the best <br />places to live and the atmosphere of downtown is a big part of that and it shouldn't <br />be lost. She fee two buildings have historical value for downtown. <br /> <br /> <br />Don Atwood, 298 S Taft Court, stated that downtown property values have <br />incr ed because of e planned railroad station and people need to be aware of the <br />cha that station will bring to the area. He noted that he doesn't want Louisville <br />to all evelopment that makes the town just like all the others in the metro area. <br />He ur the applicant to listen to the desires of the community. He would like to see the <br />City's p servation ordinance changed to include land marking without the owners' <br />consent. <br /> <br />Barb Hesson, 526 Lafarge Avenue, stated that downtown is a major part of the City and <br />that the existing buildings have personality that should not be lost. She said that the loss <br />of downtown buildings would make Louisville look like every other town. <br /> <br />Reggie Schmidt, 377 Jackson Circle, stated that the downtown merchants advertise it as <br />"Historic Downtown" and it won't be historic if everything is torn down. She would like to <br />