Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 03 16 CANCELLED

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes February 24th, 2020 Page 5 of 14 Haley asked about the movement of the windows and doors. Dickinson stated that she intended to have the house look as much like it does as possible. She bought the house because of how it looks, including the size, porch, and chimneys. She explained that her children had grown up in a historic home and that she was a lover of legacy and history. She was also a teacher many of her children and grandchildren lived just down the street from this house. She expressed that the house belonged to Louisville, not her, and that the house could be used for preservation - related open houses. She explained that she wanted the windows to drop a foot (not to widen) and that she wanted a wider porch with room for two chairs facing each other. She read a line from a David White poem, "This is the bright home in which I live. This is where I ask my friends to come. There's no house like the house of belonging." She added that the door needed to be wheelchair accessible and right now it was not. Ulm stated that the back part of the house and the scale was in line with what the Commission was looking for. He did not have a problem with extending the front porch because he did not think it would be that significant or out of character, and he noted that the doors being on the corner was in line with similar designs so the door change did not bother him. The thing that bothered him the most was changing the existing historic opening of the windows. Dickinson replied that she would consider keeping the windows in the same size. Dunlap asked if the proposed door was wider than the current door. Hopperstad replied that the door did not meet ADA standards and that the door width was expanding from 2'6" to 3'. He added that even if they did not put the door on the side they wanted the door to be wider. Dickinson stated that the alterations were meant to be in scale with what was already there. Haley replied that the scale of the addition was sensitive and to scale. She added that the corner door took too much of the integrity because it made a whole other side of the house. Parris had no issues with the back addition, but she agreed with Chair Haley that the structure was one of the most beautiful and oldest in Louisville and the changes to the windows and doors would give it a false sense of history. Haley added that even if the changes were in line with other historic structures, they would be losing the specific architecture that was unique to Louisville. Parris added that she appreciated the grading and that the overall framework would appear the same, but the windows and the doors were the big sticking points for her. 6