Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />21 December 2020 <br />Page 6 of 14 <br />Dunlap stated that he thought there was plenty of work that the money could be spent on. <br />Klemme and Commissioner Dunlap discussed Commissioner Dunlap's concerns about the <br />easement purchase not having enough teeth. <br />Haley asked if there were measures in place that would flag if there were going to be changes <br />to the segment of the property under the easement. <br />Zuccaro replied that it would be flagged like any other preservation -related project. <br />Haley asked for the Commission's thoughts on the preservation plans. <br />Klemme asked for more information on the proposed preservation work. <br />Johnson stated that there was some deterioration on the siding and ornamentation, which was <br />all painted wood; there would be some fortifying of the front porch; the windows would be <br />replaced back to their status in some of the historic photos; and that there would be a little bit of <br />foundation work. He added that the structural analysis of the front section found that the <br />foundation was in decent enough shape to continue supporting that part of the structure, which <br />would not receive additional loading. <br />Klemme stated that she had initially been concerned by the idea of using taxpayer money to <br />preserve something without doing the full landmarking process. She was now more comfortable <br />with the project, but noted that there needed to be a gap between landmark and easement <br />incentives. She stated that if everyone loves the conservation easements to the point where <br />there are fewer landmarks, the Commission would need to keep an eye on those numbers and <br />consider how to revert the changes to the program if necessary. She was worried that the <br />easements could encourage everyone to preserve the front 10 feet and stated that you might <br />not always like what goes behind the conservation easements. <br />Haley stated that she also wanted to think about how the easement would affect future projects <br />and she did not want to take away from the landmarking program. She noted that this could <br />become an easier way for people to do larger projects. She added that because property values <br />and construction were so expensive, the program would never be able to keep up. She did not <br />want the easement option to override the landmarking program. She thought the design for the <br />easement was fine. <br />Dunlap stated that he had only understood conservation easements as being for commercial <br />buildings, but he would like more time to look at the resolutions to address the overall issue. <br />Parris agreed with the concerns of Commissioner Klemme and Chair Haley, but she also <br />thought that getting more people involved in preservation was a good thing and this option <br />would help make that happen. She thought it would be important to have a difference between <br />easement and landmarking incentives. She did not think the program had ever been about <br />keeping every single house in Louisville the same and she did not think that was what historic <br />preservation was supposed to be about. She was comfortable talking tonight about the <br />easement on the 601 Lincoln Avenue property. She thought the purchase amount for <br />easements should be used toward preservation and that should be stipulated. <br />6 <br />