Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 01 13

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes December 16t", 2019 Page 8 of 13 Andy Johnson of DAJ Design, 922A Main Street, explained that the owner had requested a demolition permit without a lot of knowledge about city zoning and preservation. DAJ Design, and people in town she talked to, informed her of the options. Johnson explained that wooden structures like this property generally did not last past 50 years and some of them had not been taken care of. He stated that the program was voluntary and that should not change. He also noted the importance of the incentives, which is something that no other program offered. He noted that most of the reason why we preserve in Louisville is the social significance, because the architectural significance would not be enough otherwise. He noted that a 90-day stay was sufficient and that a stay should never be a penalty. It should be an incentive to preserve, not a punishment. Johnson explained that the probable cause determination based on architectural significance and he noted the changes, adding that the condition was rougher than most. Some of the foundation did not exist under the home. The HSA would help determine what could be remediated. Klemme asked what the odds were that the home could be preserved. Johnson stated that it had been years since he had been in the home. Klemme asked if the applicant would be interested in landmarking. Johnson confirmed and stated that the Commission would likely see a landmark application. Dunlap asked about the process for bringing the demolition review and probable cause hearing together at the same time. Haley responded that she thought it was a matter of giving the applicant an opportunity to discuss both at the same time. Johnson stated that the reasoning behind the double requests was partially about saving time and avoiding multiple hearings. He added that this review was an opportunity for the Commission to grant a stay. Haley invited public comment. Debbie Vogelsberg, 706 South Longmont Avenue, owned the property right across the street, where her son lived. She thought that the brand-new homes did not fit into the neighborhoods. She noted that the property was three lots and she would hate to see three large buildings there. She hoped that the owner would think about restoring rather than demolishing. Klemme stated that the 90-day stay and the assessment made sense. General agreement. Ulm asked about the timeline for the assessment. 9