HDC_08 13 2018Page 1 of 16
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
Monday, August 13, 2018, 5:00 p.m.
Board Room, City Hall
Roll Call
Quorum was present being six (6) in number.
Members Present: Chair Ted Holder
Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell
Dick Kelley
Dale Pekar
Lauren Frederick
Robert Hodge
Members Absent: Amber Jones
City Attorney: Sherri Latimer
Staff Present: Brian Minyard
Citizens Present: Tim Hankins
Brent Hopkins
Lindsey Boerner
Crystal Boerner
Mark Hinson
Elaine Hinson
Jennifer Herron
Jeff Horton
Denise Arnett
Patricia Blick
Approval of Minutes
Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell made a motion to approve the July 9, 2018 minutes as amended
with some missing commas. Commissioner Dele Pekar seconded and the motion passed with
a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent (Jones).
Notice requirements were met on all of the items except as noted in individual hearing items.
Notice of public hearing was printed in a newspaper of general circulation, posted on the
internet and emails were sent to interested citizens and the press to inform them of the agenda
being posted online.
Page 2 of 16
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax:(501) 399-3435
www.littlerock.gov
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. Two.
DATE: August 13, 2018
APPLICANT: Mark and Elaine Hinson
ADDRESS: 407 E Daisy Bates Drive
FILE NUMBER: HDC18-014
COA REQUEST: Infill House
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 407 E Daisy Bates
Drive. The property’s legal description is “East 65 feet of
Lots 1 and 2, Block 54, Original City of Little Rock,
Pulaski County, Arkansas."
This lot has been vacant since about 1999. The building
was shown as demolished because of the 1999 tornado
and is believed to have been removed shortly thereafter.
Previously on this site was the Ziesler House, a single
family building.
This application is for an Infill house with detached
garage to be built facing Daisy Bates Drive.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On April 15, 1999, a COA was approved and issued to
the City of Little Rock for demolition due to the structure
being demolished by the 1999 tornado.
On April 7, 1994, a COA was approved and issued to Joe
Kuonen for a fence to be installed in the front yard.
In the 1897 Sanborn, there was a dwelling at the corner of 14th and Rock (403 E 14th) with
outbuildings were on the southeast corner of the lot in question. Note the entirety of lots 1 and 2
was combined at that time. 1897 is the earliest Sanborn map in Little Rock. Note these are fire
insurance maps and the issue was fire safety and slate or metal was categorized as the same in
fire retardants standards.
Location of Project
Page 3 of 16
On the 1913 map, the lot was subdivided into east and west. A one story house is shown at 407
E 14th with a shingle roof and a porch roof that was either metal or slate. A large outbuilding is
on the south property line in addition to two other out buildings.
In the 1939-1950 Sanborn maps, the house had a composition roof on all roofs. The outbuilding
on the south property line was enlarged and is noted as automobile storage. The other two
outbuildings were not shown.
In the 1978 Survey map (An Architectural Survey of the MacArthur Park and Governor’s
Mansion areas of the Quapaw Quarter), shows this house and large garage in the rear
remaining.
1897 Sanborn Map (site is on upper left) 1913 Sanborn map
1939-1950 Sanborn maps 1978 Survey map
The authority of the Little Rock Historic District Commission to review new construction in the
district is authorized by the Sections 14-172-208 of the Arkansas state statute and is shown as
an attachment at the end of this report.
The authority of the Little Rock Historic District Commission to review new construction in the
district is authorized by the Sections Sec. 23-115, Sec. 23-119, and Sec. 23-120 of the Little
Rock Municipal code and is shown as an attachment at the end of this report.
Page 4 of 16
The guidelines cover new construction of Residential structures on pages 31-41 under Section
V. Design Guidelines for Detached New Construction of Primary and Secondary Buildings. Site
Design is on pages 57-64 under Section VII Design Guidelines for Site Design and is shown as
an attachment at the end of this report.
1978 survey photo 1994 file photo
Front (north) façade
Page 5 of 16
PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT
AND GUIDELINES:
SITING
This house will be the second on this half block once it is constructed. The house will face
Daisy Bates Drive as the original house did. Photos of that house are shown above. There has
been an effort to match the front façade setback of this house with the house at 401 E Daisy
Bates immediately to the west. The house is proposed to be set 13’ – 6” off of Daisy Bates and
the front porch is to be within six inches of the house at 401. These front yard setbacks are
fairly consistent with the setbacks on Rock Street, Daisy Bates and the surrounding area. New
single family construction in the next block to the west has all been built at a 15’ build to line on
street frontages (three single family houses). Note: the site plan has been revised to show six
feet between the garage and the house. The garage was shifted six feet to the east towards the
alley.
This lot has been split and is not the original layout for the
block. The original plat showed 50x140 lots running east
to west. This lot is the eastern half of lots 1 and 2.
Planning staff has determined that the Daisy Bates
frontage will serve as the zoning front setback on the lot
since that is the only street frontage that it has. Planning
Staff has also approved a 10% administrative reduction in
the front yard setback to match the setback along Daisy
Bates with the new house next door. The rear yard
setback on the south side of the lot has a 25’ setback for
the primary structure. The side yards (east and west
property lines) have 5 feet setbacks for primary structures.
Side yard setbacks are at 5’ and 5.1’. This meets the
zoning requirements for the district.
Accessory structures have 3 foot setbacks on the side and rear yards, and 60 feet from the
front. The garage/studio building has a 3’ rear yard setback and approximately 7’ setback form
the alley. These setbacks meet the zoning requirements for this district.
The house has a similar amount of site coverage with open grass area on the street frontages.
The site Coverage is similar to the historic properties in the area but may be slightly more with
the two car garage and attached studio space. The location of the garage at the rear corner of
the property is consistent with the prevailing patterns of development within the area of
influence of the subject property
Surrounding properties left Project site Surrounding properties right
Updated site plan
Page 6 of 16
Across street left Across street Across street right
The house at 1402 and 1410 Commerce have horizontal wood siding. The apartment building
at 1422 Commerce has a painted brick finish. The house at 1410 Rock has horizontal wood
siding and the apartment building at 1400 Rock is all brick. Infill houses in the area of influence
have Hardie plank siding and metal siding.
HEIGHT
The height of this building is proposed to be approximately 26’5” tall, which is below the zoning
requirement of 35 feet. The chimney is below this height. This height is comparable to the
houses to the left and right and the historic one on the corner of Rock and Daisy Bates.
PROPORTION
The house is an ell shape with the one story portion parallel with Daisy Bates and the two story
portion perpendicular to Daisy Bates Drive. This separates the roofing into two units and is
accentuated with the lower metal roof between the two. The two story portion visually equals
the mass of the one story portion. The verticalness of the windows and the spacing give a more
traditional proportion to the structure. The houses on each side of this project are two stories.
The house at 1402 Commerce is a large two story block while the house at 401 Daisy Bates is
an ell shape as this one is. With the ell shape, the proposed house is wider than most houses
in the area but fits between the two immediate neighbors. The north side of the street is vacant.
The proportions of the windows are more vertical than the immediate area, but are not
distracting. The west wall does have a low proportion of wall to void ratio. Additional windows
on that side visible from the street would aid in reducing that proportion of overabundance of
solid wall.
RHYTHM
The rhythm of door and windows on the front façade is harmonious and traditional in nature as
is the east façade with its chimney and flanking windows. The west façade is not rhythmic in its
placement of windows. The addition of more windows or moving one to be vertically aligned
over the other would make this more orderly.
SCALE
The proposed building’s scale is between the large house at 1402 Commerce and the new
house at 401 Daisy Bates. The separation of wings of the house lessens the scale of the house
by dividing the mass into two different pieces. The 10/12 roof on the lower east wing visually
gives that wing more height.
Page 7 of 16
MASSING
The massing of the historic house at 1402 Commerce is so large, that it overshadows any
proposed or existing house on the block. This project aims for the middle ground between it and
structures in the area and the new construction next door. By doing so, this allows the house to
be compatible with the area.
ENTRANCE AREA
The Primary entrance faces Daisy Bates Drive.
The front door will be a solid core flush metal
door painted to match the dark bronze color of
the windows. There will be a transom above the
door and a wide sidelight to the left of the door.
There will be a 1/12 pitch metal roof over the
entry porch in bronze color. Painted metal
columns will support the porch. Concrete steps
will lead up to the porch. The porch is
approximately 6’ by 8’-6”. Handrails will be a
metal cable system.
WALL AREAS
The house is an ell shape with the rear wing
being on the west side of the lot. The front
elevation hints to this fact with the lower level of
metal roofing that separates the two wings. The
main house will be of ivory brick, in an off white tone. The foundation of the house will be
approximately 2’-10” at the front of the house. The windows will be either Windsor or Quaker
brand. The windows will be a vinyl window in dark bronze color. The windows on the front on
the front of the house are placed traditionally, with three east of the door while the ones to the
west on the two story portion are stacked vertically on top of each other with one in the attic
space. These are four over four windows. The windows on the east wing are 3’-4” wide by 7’-6”
tall. The windows on west wing are (from bottom) 3’-4” wide by 7’-6”, 3’-4” wide by 7’-0”, and in
the attic 2’-6” wide by 2’-6”.
Side (East) Elevation without fence (partial red flags point to windows remove or added).
Front Door Detail
Page 8 of 16
There will be two windows on the east side of the house flanking the fireplace. These windows
will always be visible from the street because of the alley. The windows are 3’-4” wide by 7’-6”
tall. The other east facing windows will be partially obscured from view by the fence around the
patio. The partial red flags denote changes from the original submittal. One horizontal window
was added to the garage building and one window was deleted form the interior patio area.
Side (West) Elevation without fence (partial red flags point to windows remove or added).
The windows on the west façade of the house will be visible from the street. There are only two
windows on this façade. The windows are not aligned vertically with each other. The window
openings are not oriented vertically and symmetrically within the west wall area as stated in the
Guidelines. Ideally, there would be more windows on this side of the house. When viewing the
interior plans of the house, the second floor window could be aligned with the lower master bath
window to have a more traditional window arrangement. Historically, houses would have many
more windows per side than two for a wall this large.
The partial red flags denote changes from the original submittal. One horizontal window was
added to the garage building but may not be seen from a street.
The south façade of this house will not be as visible from Rock Street with the privacy fence and
the detached garage. On the two story west wing, the windows are stacked vertically and
placed in the corner of the mass. The sizes of the windows from the bottom to the top are 3’-4”
wide by 7’-6” on the lower floor and 3’-4” wide by 6’-6” on the upper floor. There are three
windows in the east wing that mirror those on the front of the house.
The rhythm of the front of the house is very regular with windows and doors equally spaced in
the mass. The land across the street is vacant. The windows on the house at 1402 Commerce
are more regularly spaced and stacked as is the historic apartment building at Rock and Daisy
Bates. Some windows in the house are single ones and other are ganged. The use of single
windows is on the more public sides of the house. The windows clearly identify floor elevations
in the house.
Page 9 of 16
The garage is proposed with metal siding and trim in a Meridian Panel by McElroy Meatal in
dark bronze color. This is a standing seam roofing system with 12” width panels that will be
used on the walls. This is the same metal that is being proposed on the front porch roof and the
hyphen between the wings. On Page 38 of the guidelines it states that it is appropriate to
“Employ exterior materials that are present on buildings within the area of influence” and to
“Employ modern exterior materials that closely resemble the proportions, rhythm, scale, and
mass of exterior materials that are present on buildings within the area of influe nce. This
Meridian metal roofing applied as siding does neither of these two. With the principal building
materials in the
area of influence
being horizontal
wood siding or
brick, this material is
not appropriate.
Meridian Flat pan standing seam roof
There are two
windows in the garage. One will face the alley on the east side of the structure and one on the
west side that may not be visible from Rock Street. The window on the garage is a 6’-0” wide by
2’-0” tall. This casement window will be visible from the street and is contrary to the guideline on
page 37 that says: it is inappropriate to: Orient window openings horizontally in a primary wall
area. An example would be a modern strip window set high above finished floors which are out
of proportion and rhythm within the district. One or more individual square windows would be
more appropriate.
The garage is proposed to have a flush panel garage door with no windows in black or dark
bronze color.
Brick Color Garage doors Windows
ROOF AREA
The roofing proposed on the bulk of the house and the garage is an architectural shingle by
CertainTeed in a Weatherwood color. A composition shingle is prevalent in the area of
influence. The front porch and a section of the house running north-south between the wings
will be the Meridian Panel by McElroy Meatal in dark bronze color. See photos above in Wall
Area section.
Page 10 of 16
The pitch of the roof for the shingled areas is a 10/12
and the pitch for the metal roof varies from 1/12 at the
front porch to 3/12 on the rear porch and house. There
are no dormers shown on the plan. Trim on the soffit
and fascia of the house are minimal and are noted to be
10” deep.
The Meridian roof provided by McElroy is shown below.
It does not have a flat pan as the one shown on the
right. Historically, the standing seam roofs had a flat
pan in the middle, no ribs or ridges.
FAÇADE
The front and east façades are the most traditional of the house and they are the most public
sides. These facades will be all brick with large regularly spaced windows. Brick has been a
mainstay building material in the district for homes built within the period of significance.
DETAILING
Detailing on this house is minimal. An infill house should not have overly detailed bargeboards
or trim around doors and windows. The plans do not show trim around the doors and windows,
but a smaller brick stop trim or something similar will be used to bridge the gap between the
brick and the windows. The soffit and fascia are noted as painted wood trim. This level of trim is
appropriate for an infill house. The elevations do show a soldier course header above the
windows and a rowlock sill below. It appears that the brick elevations will continue to the
ground level without any separation between foundation and wall.
The chimney is proposed on the east end of the house near the alley. It is shown as a
rectangular mass with a metal spark arrestor on the top. No details are given on the spark
arrestor other than to be of a dark bronze finish.
The metal cable system to be used for the handrail at the front porch could be considered to be
a minimalist design meant to fade into the background. With the brick cheek wall extending
past the steps, it will be somewhat obscured.
SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGIES
No sustainable technologies were noted on the plan or application.
SITE DESIGN:
SIDEWALKS:
There is an existing brick walk along Daisy Bates. The
new walk from the entry to the street should be poured
to the edge of it without removing the existing brick
sidewalk. The concrete walk as well as the concrete
driveway at the garage should be a broom finish in
standard color.
PLANNED GREEN SPACE:
There will be lawn area to the north and east of the
house. A large magnolia tree and a crepe myrtle may be
in the right of way but are not noted on the survey. Care should be taken if these trees are to be
Roof shingles
Original brick sidewalk
Page 11 of 16
saved.
FENCES AND RETAINING WALLS:
There are no existing fences on the property.
A Trex fence is proposed in the back yard
areas to match the neighbors to the west. It
will be six feet tall and start near the rear of
the west façade (more than halfway) and
continue around the back yard to the garage
obscuring most of the south façade with the
fence. This fence will hide the condensing
unit from the street. A separate fence will
enclose the patio area on the east side
abutting the alley. That fence will run from the
corner of the house to the corner of the
garage.
LIGHTING
Lighting for the front porch will be ‘simple in form and size’. The lighting should not be visible
from the street view. Security lighting, such as flood lights, should intrude as
little as possible on the integrity of the neighborhood. They should be mounted
on secondary and rear facades. Shields should focus the light down, not at
neighboring property.
RESIDENTIAL PARKING:
Off street parking shall be in the garage located off the alley or between the
alley and the garage doors. The driveway is proposed to be concrete
approximately twenty plus feet wide.
CURB CUTS:
No additional curb cuts are proposed.
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND SERVICE AREAS
The condensing unit for the air conditioning unit is proposed to be behind the six foot tall privacy
fence that surrounds the rear yard.
Electrical and gas meters and other mechanical equipment should be located on the rear façade
of the house or the south façade of the garage.
Satellite Dishes:
The applicant is not requesting a satellite dish.
Recreational Structures:
The swimming pool will be located in the rear yard and screened with a six foot tall fence.
Trex fence of 401 Daisy Bates
Proposed
lighting
Page 12 of 16
Rear (South) Elevation without fence
SUMMARY OF PRE-APPLICATION HEARING
The applicant attended the April 27, 2018 pre application meeting. The comments from
the commissioners are summarized as follows:
• SITING – front yard setback seems close, verify surrounding setbacks; generally
okay.
• HEIGHT – verify max height, adjust accordingly.
• PROPORTION – Design appears to be proportional, provide elevations with
surrounding context; generally okay.
• RHYTHM – rhythm of windows is off, heights, sizes and spacing varies widely;
west side windows especially more consistent design
• SCALE – okay; okay
• MASSING – okay; okay
• ENTRANCE AREA – okay; front door and sidelight seem oversized for entrance
area.
• WALL AREAS – okay; decide on exterior materials, prefer to see multiple materials
vs all brick.
• ROOF AREA – okay; okay.
• FAÇADE – okay; okay.
• DETAILING – take a look and give some thought; need to decide on exterior
materials.
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS:
The project is appropriate in the following sections: Siting, Height, Scale, Massing, Entrance
Area, Roof Area, Façade, Detailing, and Site Design. The project could be more appropriate in
the areas of Proportion, Rhythm, and Wall areas, by modifying the following:
Page 13 of 16
1) Adjusting the windows on the west side of the house preferably by adding additional windows
near the front of the house or at least aligning the windows vertically with each other. This is
contrary to the statement on page 37 of the Guidelines to “Orient window and door openings
vertically and symmetrically within a given wall area.
2) The siding choice on the detached garage is a material that was not typically used for siding
on walls historically in the neighborhood. On Page 38 of the guidelines it states that it is
appropriate to “Employ exterior materials that are present on buildings within the area of
influence” and to “Employ modern exterior materials that closely resemble the proportions,
rhythm, scale, and mass of exterior materials that are present on buildings within the area of
influence. This Meridian metal roofing applied as siding does neither of these two. With the
principal building materials in the area of influence being horizontal wood siding or brick, this
material is not appropriate.
3) There are two windows in the garage. One will face the alley on the east side of the
structure and one on the west side that may not be visible from Rock Street. The window on the
garage is a 6’-0” wide by 2’-0” tall. This casement window will be visible from the street and is
contrary to the guideline on page 37 that says: it is inappropriate to: Orient window openings
horizontally in a primary wall area. An example would be a modern strip window set high above
finished floors which are out of proportion and rhythm within the district. One or more individual
square windows would be more appropriate. To make the project more appropriate, the garage
could be bricked or choosing another siding choice. Historically, garages and principal
structures did not always match and some were different materials on different sides depending
if they were visible from the street.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no
comments regarding this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a building permit.
2. Any changes to the elevations of the building in any phase of the permitting process to
be reviewed by Staff.
3. No electric meters, hvac equipment, cable boxes, satellite dishes, or other utility
equipment to be installed on street facing facades.
4. Add a window to the west façade on the lower floor near the front setback or align the
proposed two windows vertically.
5. Change siding material on the garage to one that was historically used in the area of
influence.
6. Modify window on the east wall of the garage to a square window or three individual
windows.
COMMISSION ACTION: August 13, 2018
Brian Minyard, Staff, made a presentation to the Commission. There were no questions from
the Commissioners to Staff.
Staff received one call on the application of an informational nature.
Mark Hinson stated that they were going to add a window to the west wall of the house. The
window would be in the hallway on the second floor on top of the one on the first floor. On the
east wall of the garage, they were going to delete the window. On the west side, they replaced
the window with a 3 foot wide door with a full lite window. This door will be visible from the
Page 14 of 16
courtyard. Mr. Minyard said that the window on the west side of the garage was not an issue to
Staff.
Mr. Hinson said that they would like to fight for the siding on the garage. Chair Holder asked if
the vertical metal siding was only on the garage. Mr. Hinson said yes. Photos of garages and
siding in the area were provided to the Commission and Staff. Mr. Hinson said that they would
have architectural shingles on the roof. There was a discussion of some of the photos. Jennifer
Herron, architect, said that they went around the MacArthur Park district and took photos of
wood board and batten siding. She said that there is some metal used in the area with metal
siding. This is an accessory structure, not the principal structure. For the garage, she would like
to have the option of using the standing seam panel on the garage. Mr. Minyard referred the
Commission to the photo on page eight of the staff report.
Jennifer Herron provided photos of wood board and batten in MacArthur Park and in other
areas. Jeff Horton stated that they could get the flat pan metal siding if it was desired. They
color is proposed to be dark bronze to match the trim in the windows. Chair Holder stated that
he thought that the flat pan may fit in better.
Lindsey Boerner, 401 E Daisy Bates, spoke in favor of the proposal and commented that it was
a beautiful design.
Patricia Blick, QQA Executive Director, stated that she was endorsing the application and feels
that the siding is a modern interpretation of the material. Chair Holder asked her if she would
prefer the flat pan or one with striations. She replied that it was a secondary building without
direct street frontage and that either would work. The color did not bother her and prefers this
color over any color such as a galvalume or galvanized finish.
Commissioner Dale Pekar has trouble with the overall design of building. The one story portion
is disproportionate for the 2 story section. When looking at the house, it appears that the house
is two stories and that the garage portion is to the east and was later converted to living
quarters. He felt that the two masses were jarring.
He commented what size the porch columns were and thought they were undersized. He
stated that they should not be smaller than 4x4’” posts. Are the windows muntins placed
internally? He feels that these windows will look like they have storm windows placed over
them. He would prefer that the muntins be on the exterior of the glass. He cannot see the
metal cable for the porch railing as appropriate for use in the district.
Commissioner Pekar asked about the fence on the west side of the house. Mr. Minyard clarified
that it was the fence at the back yard but with elevations, they appear to be closer that in reality.
Chair Holder commented that elevations can be tricky because it looks like the garage was
attached to the house, but it is not.
Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell wanted to clarify one point on Wall Area. The guidelines state that
in general, it is appropriate to orient window and door openings vertically and symmetrically in a
given wall area. He stated that this did refer to stacking windows but instead referred to the
individual sizes and shapes of the windows. He did not think that Staff interpreted the
guidelines correctly. He continued that the two windows on the west side clearly identify the
floor elevations and he feels that it is symmetrical with a solid, a void, a solid. He stated that we
Page 15 of 16
do not design the interior of the house. He feels the siding mimics the board and batten with
modern interpretation. He agrees with the strip windows in the garage.
Chair Holder asked if the applicant wanted to amend his application. Mr. Hinson said that they
had added the window on the west side of the house as a compromise, but it they could not add
it, they would not. They would like to drop the window on the east side of the garage and modify
the garage west window to a door. Mr. Minyard asked to clarify the application. The applicants
officially changed his application delete the east window in the garage and change the west
window in the garage to a door.
Vice Chair Russell added that he agreed with Commissioner Pekar that the muntins on the
windows should be on the exterior of the glass. He feels that it would be more appropriate for
the district. He did not have an issue with the cable handrail. Chair Holder stated that he saw
the applicant agree to the window muntins to be on the exterior of the glass. He asked if Mr.
Hinson agreed and he said yes.
Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell made a motion to approve the application at 407 E Daisy Bates as
amended with staff recommendations 1, 2 and 3. Commissioner Robert Hodge seconded.
Chair Holder stated that he was okay with the two windows on the west side of the house since
it faced the other house. He said he did not agree with Vice Chair Russell’s reading of the
guidelines.
Chair Holder said that he did not agree with Vice Chair Russell on the windows. The motion
passed with 5 ayes, 1 no (Pekar) and 1 absent (Jones).
Other Matters
Enforcement issues
Staff reported that they were still working on the enforcement on 8th and Sherman. The tenant
came in to talk and maybe filing an application. She was informed that the landlord would have
to approve the application. Mr. Minyard emailed the owner that information but has not heard
from either of them since.
Certificates of Compliance
A spreadsheet was distributed to the Commission earlier. A COC was issued for 1410 Rock
Street for siding repair, repaint, etc. 407 E th Street is a tax credit project with new heat and air
systems with the units being placed on the back of the building. 624 Ferry Street is for
renovating the front door.
Citizen Communication
There were no citizens that chose to speak during citizen communication.
Chair Holder stated that this was Commissioner Dick Kelley's last hearing and wanted to thank
him for his service to the city.
Adjournment
There was a motion to adjourn and the meeting ended at 5:42 p.m.
Attest:
Chair Date
Secretry/Staff Date
Page 16 of 16