Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2023 07 17

Home Browse Search

2. The relationship of the building as a No The house is not located in a historic potential contributing structure to a district. potential historical district per the criteria set forth in this chapter, 3. The reasonable condition of the Unknown The applicant did not provide any building*, and documentation regarding the condition of the property. 4. The reasonable projected cost of Unknown A specific projected cost was not restoration or repair.* included as part of the application. * In considering the condition of the building and the projected cost of restoration or repair as set forth in subsections H.3 and HA above, the Commission may not consider deterioration caused by unreasonable neglect. RECOMMENDATION: LMC Sec. 15.36.200 notes that the purpose of demolition review is to: 1. Prevent loss of buildings that may have historic and architectural significance; and 2. Provide the time necessary to initiate designation as an individual landmark or to consider alternatives for the building. Staff finds that the structures could meet the social and architectural significance criteria and therefore could qualify for landmarking. Based on evaluation of the criteria in LMC Sec. 15.36.200, the HPC may release the permit, or place a stay on the application for up to 180 days from the date of application, which was June 5, 2023. A full 180 day stay would expire on December 2, 2023. Although staff addressed the structures together, the HPC may release the permit on some structures and not others. Staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the demolition request. While the structures could meet the criteria for landmarking, members of the development team for the current Plat/PUD for this property are already familiar with the preservation program and have met with staff, and they do not contemplate maintaining the structures in their redevelopment plan. In addition, the Louisville Historical Museum previously reviewed the properties for collection acquisition purposes. As such, the applicant does not need additional time to consider the possibilities for landmarking and staff does not need additional time to document or salvage materials on the property. While the structures have an interesting and significant social history, staff does not feel that the social history alone merits a stay of demolition when weighed against these other considerations. However, staff does not find that the previous demolition releases are compelling reasons to release this demolition request, in large part because the ownership of the property has changed since the first two reviews in 2017 and 2020. In addition, the 2017 review found that the buildings could qualify for landmarking and the 2020 release did not change the substance of that finding. Demolition Review 4