My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2010 09 20
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2010 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2010 09 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:14 PM
Creation date
10/5/2010 10:08:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2010 09 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
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 />August 16, 2010 <br />Page 7 of 8 <br />There was later discussion regarding the dedicated HPC employee. Several <br />members of the Commission expressed their interest in having these discussions <br />brought forward to the City Manager. <br />Update/Discussion/Action – Possible Commercial Incentives <br />McCartney presented the memo included in the packet. <br />Popptiz questioned the actual amounts of the Business Assistance Program <br />(BAP). <br />McCartney stated he was not familiar enough with the BAP’s to give any more <br />information than what was shown on the handout. The Commission had asked <br />for the BAP information to be included as an example of the types of assistance <br />the City of Louisville offers commercial business owners. <br />Poppitz has heard from several business owners there is not enough money out <br />there to incentivize additional commercial development. <br />Tofte asked if the BAP information was public information. <br />McCartney answered in the affirmative as BAP’s are approved by resolution <br />before City Council. <br />Stewart asked if there could be addresses included on the BAP’s. <br />Poppitz stated he would continue his discussions with developers regarding this <br />issue and have more information at the next meeting. <br />Leary offered to draft a proposal that could be brought forward to City Council <br />recommending more incentives for downtown businesses. <br />Poppitz asked if the Commission was primarily interested in commercial buildings <br />50 years or older. <br />Koertje stated no – it should include buildings of character as well. <br />Committee Reports - none <br />Update on Demolition Requests <br />McCartney stated there were two demolition requests requested for review by the <br />subcommittees and there was one more demolition review to meet regarding <br />2245 East Street. <br />Items from Commission Members <br />Lewis stated there is still a typo in the Old Town Overlay Handout which needs to be <br />modified. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.