My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2021 03 15
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2021 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2021 03 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2021 2:45:16 PM
Creation date
10/19/2021 8:01:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
3/15/2021
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Quality Check
10/19/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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 />15 March 2021 <br />Page 2 of 8 <br />• Staff: Kim Bauer <br />Bauer presented the assessor's card for the property from around 1950 alongside images from <br />today and noted a 1990s addition to the structure. She reviewed the landmark criteria, <br />explaining that staff found that the principal structure was constructed around 1890 and <br />therefore met the age requirement; met social significance through association to the Porto and <br />Boyce families, who were associated with coal mining and other important aspects of Louisville <br />history; and met physical integrity by virtue of its being in the original location. Bauer added that <br />there were other landmarks nearby and that the property was located in Louisville's first <br />residential subdivision. Bauer noted that staff did not find that the structure met architectural <br />integrity due to the 1990s addition. Overall, staff recommended a finding of probable cause. <br />Haley asked if a lack of differentiation between the historic structure and the addition was at <br />issue for the architectural integrity. <br />Bauer confirmed and added that the original structure maintained architectural integrity. <br />Haley stated that the structure met the age and social significance requirements, and the <br />integrity issue could be worked on to differentiate the 1990s addition. <br />Dunlap asked if the vertical window on the upper level was original. <br />Bauer replied that there were no extant photographs before 1950, so staff could not be sure, <br />though there were gothic revival styles with those types of windows in the area from the 1890s. <br />Dunlap stated that if it were a double -hung window it could fit between the studs and noted that <br />the Commission had seen a lot of different kinds of windows in attic spaces. <br />Haley stated that an assessment could help determine whether it was an original window. She <br />believed that there was some work to do to differentiate the 1990s addition but otherwise it met <br />the criteria. <br />Klemme agreed and thought it was worthwhile to get a Historic Structure Assessment (HSA) <br />and see what needed to be done to make sure the original portion was stable. <br />Burg agreed and noted that it met two of the criteria strongly. <br />Dunlap added that the street preserved the feeling of Old Town almost more than any other <br />street. <br />Klemme moved to find probable cause. Dunlap seconded. Motion passed unanimously by voice <br />vote. <br />Haley noted that the owner and applicant had not been called on. She asked if they wanted to <br />speak. <br />Andy Johnson of DAJ Design, 922A Main Street, said that they supported the decision and did <br />not need to speak. <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.