My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2017 11 20
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2017 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2017 11 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:20 PM
Creation date
11/22/2017 8:56:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2017 11 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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 />October 16, 2017 <br />Page 2 of 10 <br />requesting to demolish the entire structure. Dean stated that the building is of the Folk -Victorian <br />style and has some original construction, including decorative shingles, turned posts, and <br />decorative brackets. Modifications include an enclosed porch, steel siding, new windows and a <br />new front door, and a patio roof. The structure is 112 years old and maintains integrity in form <br />and location. <br />Staff finds that the building has social significance as it has been in the same Italian family for <br />79 years and Italians were an important factor in the settlement of Louisville. Architecturally it is <br />in reasonable condition to be landmarked. If the Commission placed a 180 -day stay it would <br />expire on March 6th, 2018. <br />Koertje asked if the staff had discussed land -marking grants for repairs with the applicant. <br />Dean responded that they had. <br />Applicant — Ronald Buffo 1220 Grant Avenue, Louisville, stated that six generations of Buffos <br />have lived in Louisville since 1893 and now the sixth generation of Buffos is living on the <br />property. As such they respected the Commission's work and the history of the town. Buffo <br />stated, however, that the internal condition of the house has major issues. The foundation — a <br />concrete foundation with a dirt cellar — has been compromised. HUD reinforced the basement a <br />few years ago and there are beams that hold up the flooring, but there are still crumbling dirt <br />walls in the basement. Buffo did not have a cost estimate for building a new foundation. He <br />stated that the water heater is also located in the basement, the wiring is old and much of it <br />needs to be redone, and there is very little insulation in the roof, the windows don't close well, <br />and the sewer will eventually need to be redone. Buffo added that there are also safety issues. <br />His daughter intends to live on the property in a new home that will accommodate a family of <br />five, but there is not enough room in the existing structure for a family of five. Buffo stated that <br />the family did not want to sell the property. <br />Chuck Thomas asked if the applicant would consider adding to the existing structure, such as <br />other residents have done with old homes in Louisville. <br />Buffo responded that they had considered that option, but that the existing structure would still <br />require a lot of work to accommodate a viable add-on. Their plan is to start from scratch with a <br />new foundation and try to maintain a few historical aspects of the house, such as the gables. <br />Chuck Thomas noted that they could ask for a grant to incorporate the existing structure. <br />Ulm asked if the add-on option was totally out of consideration. <br />Buffo replied that the family was not considering an add-on. <br />Haley asked for public comment. Seeing none, she turned to closed discussion. <br />Chuck Thomas observed that the family did not seem to want to incorporate the old building, <br />which is what he usually advocates. <br />Fahey stated that the current appearance of the house was not close to the original structure. <br />The social significance of the Buffo ownership would be continued regardless of the physical <br />structure. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.