Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />22 February 2021 <br />Page 6 of 10 <br />Dunlap noted that the Commission had previously cited concerns with the structure, but had <br />thought it was a good idea to move forward even if it was a stretch to match with the <br />Department of the Interior standards. Dunlap asked if the design proposed tonight was different <br />from the landmark design. <br />Bauer addressed changes to the structure, replying that the current stucco was installed in 1997 <br />and therefore was not historic. She stated that the stucco would be repaired and restored where <br />it remained. Bauer addressed the stucco on the addition, noting that it was new stucco, which <br />was preferred according to the standards because it was not trying to look like the historic <br />portion. It allowed the differentiation to be clear. <br />Dunlap explained that the plans that were considered for the landmark were not the same as <br />what was being presented today. <br />Bauer replied that the alteration was only for the back piece but she stated that there was an <br />alteration for the front part under the landmark, which had already been approved by the <br />Commission in November. <br />Andy Johnson of DAJ Design, 922A Main Street in Louisville, described the different sections of <br />the house and when they were built. He showed pictures of the original wood lap siding, which <br />they planned to restore. He stated that they were proposing to remove a portion of the building <br />in the rear and replace it with a one-story, some new foundation, and a new addition in the mid- <br />point of the site. He stated that they had pushed back the addition on the 125-foot site as much <br />as possible, which allowed people walking down the sidewalk to see the corner of the original <br />house with a recess and setback to the new addition. He noted that where the original siding <br />existed they were going to show it. He described the landscaping plan, which would create <br />outdoor rooms rather than lawn space because it was a small area. Johnson showed the gabled <br />roof form that would connect the historic building to the new building. He showed the <br />perspective view from Jefferson Avenue, noting that the addition was differentiated by form, <br />materials, and window openings, and noted that the addition had a background feel. It was two <br />stories, so it would be visible, but it kept the historic building forward front. <br />Haley asked about the metal roof on the original building. <br />Johnson stated that the Commission had discussed the roof in the last meeting and that it was <br />an alteration of the existing bay window, which was not historic, and the metal roof was one of <br />the ways of differentiating the changed portion of the historic structure. <br />Haley stated that she remembered thinking of the right side of the original building as the more <br />historic one. <br />Johnson agreed and stated that the historic siding was on the right side, as well. He noted that <br />the midcentury addition had a shiplap siding, and some of that would be wrapped around to the <br />front. <br />Haley asked her fellow commissioners for comments on the alteration certificate. <br />6 <br />