Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 11 18

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 21 st, 2019 Page 7 of 12 Haley asked for commissioner comment. Seeing none, she stated that since the landmarking was only the first 10 feet of the house there were no extraordinary circumstance. Dickinson noted that it was important that the grant was matching, yet he was also more reluctant than usual to grant the amount since he wished there was more being preserved. He did not see an extraordinary circumstance. Return to motion to approve Resolution 5, Series 2019. Roll call vote. Motion passed unanimously. 816 Main Street: Landmark and Grant Request. (Resolutions 6 and 7, Series 2019) Selvoski presented the landmark request. Staff finds that the proposal meets the criteria for age since the structures were constructed in the early 1900s and were renovated in 1955 (the sign was added in 1956.) Staff finds that the proposal meets the criteria for architectural significance based on the 1955-56 changes. The structure is associated with the Colacci family, a notable Louisville family, and thus the proposal meets social significance. Staff also finds that the structure and signage is culturally significant to the history of Louisville for its geographic and environmental significance as a presence on Main Street. Finally, staff finds that the structure meets the criteria for physical integrity, as has the neon sign. Selvoski presented the grant request. She displayed the enumerated costs. She noted that the work had largely been completed, but the Commission was able to approve completed work if it had been done in the last 5 years. Staff finds that the kind of work was compatible with the preservation grant, as well. Staff recommends approval of a matching Preservation and Restoration Grant in the amount of $48,667.39 in addition to a $50,000 Landmark Incentive Grant. Dunlap stated that he thought it was an appropriate use of funds. Haley invited the applicant to speak. Michael Salerno, Alex Thompson, and Jeff Osaka introduced themselves. Thompson asked for consideration of the other costs, including permits and cleanup. He explained that the owner decided to bring the restaurant up to snuff even while facing a personal health crisis. Given the overall breadth of what this program can offer, he asked for consideration for costs that correspond to work that is approved in this type of grant structure. Dickinson asked who incurred the costs. Thompson replied that one of the two owners remained and all the work that had been done was in the last 6 months. The ownership of the building remained the same. 8