City Council Agenda and Packet 2015 08 18

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes July 28, 2015 Page 16 of 28 • The Preservation Program could lose its reputation as a proactive, incentive - based program at the county, state and national level. • The Preservation Program would be out of sync with the state and national preservation standard. • Creates an assessment of eligibility that does not consider significance and integrity. • The preservation best practice is to use a "period of significance" for an individual building or historic district, not a whole city. • Properties on either side of the fixed date and otherwise equally eligible for landmarking would be treated differently, leading to inequitable treatment. • Excludes protection and recognition of iconic Louisville resources. • Could be interpreted as inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan (historic character, sense of place, unique environments). Options: 1) Fixed date city -wide for both landmark eligibility and demolition review. 2) Fixed date city -wide for demolition review/ keep 50 years for voluntary landmark eligibility. 3) Keep 50 years for landmark eligibility and demolition review. 4) Establish some other period of significance, more or less than 50 years, for landmark eligibility and demolition review. Historic Preservation Commission Recommendation: On June 15, 2015 the HPC reviewed and discussed the pros /cons of establishing a fixed date and voted to keep the existing 50 years for landmark eligibility and demolition review. Commissioners felt there was no problem with the existing 50 years as a place to start and felt it is important to retain the national standard. Staff Recommendation: Based on the HPC recommendation and staff's review, staff recommended the Council endorse Option 3, the existing progressive 50 year date for the City of Louisville. Staff recognized the need to streamline and restructure the demolition review process to address the concerns and will propose changes in the near future. PUBLIC COMMENTS Michael Koertje, 887 Welch Court, Louisville, CO, HPC member, addressed the discussion for replacing the 50 -year rolling standards for landmarking eligibility and demolition review and felt this is a solution in search of a problem. He stated the 50 year standards are working well, both here and nationally. The argument for changing to a fixed date has been Louisville's period of significance ended when the mines closed. Some people believe anything built since their lifetime does not have any historic significance. He did not believe the period of significance should be tied to the mines. Louisville continued to grow and thrive after the mines closed. There are many significant people living in Louisville since the 1950's. He suggested enjoying the 46