My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2009 03 16
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2009 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2009 03 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:23 PM
Creation date
5/11/2009 10:46:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2009 03 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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 />March 16, 2009 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />situation. Muckle added that the demolition of the Zurick home in the 1000 block <br />of Grant Avenue was an example where the block was intact until the loss of that <br />home. <br />Lewis stated that she feels the Commission has gotten much better at doing <br />reviews since the Zurick home was demolished and that they committee is ver <br />good at keeping to the specific criteria in the ordinance. <br />Whiteman asked if that home was a good example of a specific architecture why <br />it wouldn't be stayed for a public hearing anyway. <br />Koertje added that the current criteria allow for the discussion of a "building that <br />is specifically representative of an era or people" and he thought that would cover <br />Muckle's concerns. <br />Lewis noted that when complete surveying is done, the review can include <br />information such as "the building is one of six examples" of a particular <br />architecture and that can be very helpful in the evaluation. <br />Whiteman stated that if a review member has any reason to think the building <br />may qualify for landmarking they should bring it to a public hearing. <br />Muckle noted her concern is particularly related to when a demolition is the first <br />of a block or area where there is currently great integrity. She wanted to have the <br />conversation to help members keep the issue in mind. She noted that her <br />concern is difficult to articulate but she thought it was a helpful discussion. <br />Whiteman noted this highlights the need to review possible historic districts. <br />Discussion/Direction/Action - Landmarking of Louisville Cemetery <br />Discussion/Direction/Action -Demolition Review Fees <br />Both of these items were continued to the April meeting as they were put on the <br />agenda by Tofte and Stewart respectively. <br />Update on Demolition Requests -None <br />Muth noted that one review is currently pending and a report will be made in <br />April. <br />Discussion/Comments on Planning Department Referrals <br />None <br />Updates <br />1800 Plaza Drive Hecla Casino Building -stay expires 4/19/09 <br />Lewis gave a brief review of the project so that Williams could understand where <br />the project stands now. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.