Loading...
HDC_01 11 2016Page 1 of 24 LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, January 11, 2016, 5:00 p.m. Board Room, City Hall Roll Call Quorum was present being seven (7) in number. Members Present: Chair BJ Bowen Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell Toni Johnson Page Wilson Jennifer Carman Rebecca Pekar Dick Kelley Members Absent: none City Attorney: Debra Weldon Staff Present: Brian Minyard Citizens Present: Jimmy Moses Frank Barksdale James Sullivan Rhea Roberts Jamie Moses Cyd King Approval of Minutes Minutes for the December 2015 meeting will be resubmitted at the next public hearing. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 DATE: December 14, 2015 APPLICANT: Jimmy Moses, Moses Tucker ADDRESS: 307 and 315 East Capitol Avenue COA REQUEST: Exterior renovations and signage PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 307 (311) and 315 East Capitol Avenue. The property’s legal description for 307 East Capitol is The E54.46' Of Lots 1,2 & 3 Blk 40 Replatted as Lot 1r Block 40 together with 1125 sq ft Closed Alley Lying Al Eln thereof per 2015-045361 Of The Original City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. The property’s legal description for 315 East Capitol is The N40' Of Lot 8 & All Of Lots 9 & 10 & The W75' Of Lots 11 & 12 Blk 40 together with 1792.5 Sq Ft Closed Alley Lying Al Wln thereof per 2015-045361 of the Original City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. The building at 307 East Capitol is known as the Paragon Printing building and is a contributing structure to the district. It was built in 1947 and expanded shortly thereafter. The survey notes “International Style with floor to ceiling glass façade and large expanse of blank windowless walls. The building at 315 East Capitol Avenue is known as the MM Eberts American Legion Post and is not a contributing structure in the district. It was built around 1968. The survey notes “Commercial building with international style influences, including flat roof, simple geometric shapes and large grouped window and door opening.” This application is for both buildings for exterior renovations and signage. The Paragon Building is proposed to house a German beer hall and restaurant with outdoor seating on both sides of the building. The beer garden to the west will be 18’ wide for almost the entire length of the building. The beer garden on the east will be the width of the alley and as deep as the DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 STAFF REPORT ITEM NO. A. Location of Project American Legion Building. The American Legion Building will be utilized as a restaurant, bar, and boutique bowling alley. PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE: No previous actions were on this site were located with a search of the files on either property. American Legion Building north elevation 2006 Paragon Building north elevation 2006 PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND GUIDELINES: On page 41 of the current Guidelines, they state: Buildings, which are designated as “contributing” to a National Register Historic District, or “significant” as a National Register Historic Place will be held to a higher standard than “non- contributing” structures. The HDC will consider the designation when it evaluates rehabilitation proposals. On page 44 of the current Guidelines under doors, they state: Original doors and/or their entranceway surrounds, sidelights, transoms, and detailing should not be removed or changed. Replacement of missing original doors should be like or very similar to the original in style, materials, glazing (glass area), and lights (glass pane configuration.) Doors should not be added to the primary façade or to a secondary façade where readily visible from the street. If doors are added to an inconspicuous secondary or rear wall, they should be similar to the original doors. On page 49 on the current Guidelines under Masonry, they state: Brick should not be painted unless it is extremely mismatched from earlier alterations or cannot withstand weather. Contributing and Non-contributing map On page 58 of the current Guidelines under Fences, they state: Fencing material should be appropriate to the style and period of the building. Cast iron fences were common through the Victorian period and should be retained and maintained. Wrought iron and bent wire fences are also historic. Fences may be located in front, side, or rear yards, generally following property lines. Fences with street frontage should be no taller than three feet (36”) tall. On wood fences, pickets should be no wider than four inches (4”) and set no farther apart than three inches (3“). The design shall be compatible with and proportionate to the building. For larger scale properties, fence heights should be appropriate to the scale of the building and grounds. On page 60 of the current Guidelines under Lighting, they state: Original lights should be preserved. If fixtures are added, they should be from the period of the structure, or if new, simple in design, based on traditional designs of the early twentieth century. They should be mounted on porch ceilings or on the exterior wall adjacent to the primary entrance. Fixtures to avoid are carriage lamps or any fixtures evocative of a period earlier than the building. On page 63 of the current Guidelines under signage, they state: Signs should be subordinate to the architecture and overall character throughout the district. Historic signs should be preserved, including “ghost” signs on the sides of buildings. 1. Attached to Building: Signs attached to a building should not cover or obscure architectural features. Signs may be painted on windows, doors, or small panels at entrances or on awnings. Small signs may be flush-mounted on a building wall; may be hung on porches between posts; or may project from the structure. A sign on a masonry wall should be mounted in the mortar, not the masonry. 3. Materials for signs: Materials used for signs should be traditional, such as finished wood, glass, copper, or bronze, not plywood, plastic, unfinished wood, neon or other internally lighted materials, or flashing lights. Materials should be compatible with the building materials. 4. Design of signs: The design of the signs should be appropriate to the building, in size, lettering, and style. Business logos or symbols are desirable. If several businesses share a building, coordinate the signs. Flashing, rotating, moveable, or portable signs should not be used. 5. Lighting of signs: Lighting of signs should be from remote sources, preferably from the ground aimed directly at the sign and shielded from street view. Lighting should not use visible bulbs, internal sources or luminous paint. The Guidelines do not state a size for wall signs. The UU zoning provides for Institutional and Office zone signage regulations (36-553). That code is stated below: Sec. 36-553 Signs permitted in institutional and office zones (a) The following signs are permitted in institutional and office zones: (1) All signs as permitted in sections 36-550 through 36-552. (2) One (1) freestanding sign per premises, not to exceed two (2) square feet in sign area for each linear foot of main street frontage up to a maximum of sixty-four (64) square feet. Such sign may not exceed a height of six (6) feet. In addition to the above freestanding sign, the owner may use one (1) of the following: a. Wall or mansard signs not to exceed ten (10) percent in aggregate sign area for that occupancy's facade area. b. One (1) under-canopy or projecting sign per occupancy, not to exceed twelve (12) square feet in sign area. (3) Where a building is on a corner or has more than one (1) main street frontage, one (1) wall sign and one (1) additional freestanding sign will be allowed on the additional frontage, not to exceed the size of other wall and freestanding signs. (b) All freestanding, projecting, and under-canopy signs shall have a minimum setback of five (5) feet from any property line and vehicular public right-of-way, measured from the closest edge of the sign, and a minimum clearance of thirteen (13) feet over any vehicular use area and nine (9) feet over any pedestrian use area. Illumination is allowed but not greater than two hundred (200) footlamberts of luminance. This Staff report will be broken down into two portions, one for each of the buildings. THE PARAGON BUILDING: The Paragon building, at 307 East Capitol, is a two story building in the “Structural Expressionist” architectural style. Simply stated, the structural members of the building are expressed in the building, namely the white columns and pilasters on the front corners and along the sides of the building. Mason Toms, Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, stated that this building may be the work of Dietrich Neyland. Mr. Neyland was brought to Arkansas to work in the Cromwell office in the 1950s. He liked the red with white accents color scheme in his buildings. One of his works locally is the KATV building on Ringo Street. The Cromwell archive is currently being digitized at Arkansas Studies Institute but it not available to the public at this time to confirm if this is or is not one of his works. The front of the building features a structural member frame in white that enc ases the building on the sides and top. The structural member appears to be stucco over metal lathe and that member extends inwards to become the soffit of the building over the entrance. The center portion of the front façade has a third type of brick, a more decorative brick with rounded edges that is red in color. The mortar has been dyed to match the brick. Mr. Toms stated that this front façade brick may be a “dipped brick”, where brick was dipped in paint before installation to achieve a uniformity in color that was unavailable from firing bricks alone. The balance of the façade is a two story glass storefront floor to ceiling windows and one door on the east side. The contrast of the red brick, red mortar and the white structural members provides architectural interest in this building along with the massing of the large rectangles of glass and decorative brick. The side facades are broken into seven bays with the white structural members extending from the ground to the top of the parapet wall. The eastern façade has evidence of windows that have been bricked over. There were four large windows and one small window. There is an existing overhead door in the sixth bay. The seven bays on the east side are not a regular width as the bays on the west side are. The steel frame windows are still in place in the building, the brick was added to the exterior sill. The western façade of the building has seven bays with the first bay closest to Capitol Avenue having some of the two story floor to ceiling glass storefront windows. The brick on the sides of the building are not the same as the brick on the front. Part of the eastern wall nearest to Capitol Avenue is a buff brick that has been painted. The western wall appears to be the same brick as the balance of the eastern wall, a smooth red brick. The wall has been painted a similar color of red as the brick. A ghost sign appears on the western wall but is unintelligible. The Paragon Building Existing North Facade 2015 The Paragon Building Proposed North Facade The proposal for the front of the building would keep the following items: 1. The white concrete structural members would be cleaned and repainted white. 2. The existing storefront windows on the west side would be repaired as needed or replaced to match the existing. The proposal for the front of the building would change the following items: 3. The single aluminum storefront door would be replaced with two wood doors. 4. A 2’ x 7’ stained and painted carved wood sign would be placed over the new wood doors. 5. A 12” thick wood awning with recessed lights in the soffit would be added over the front doors at the level of the beam between the first and second floor. 6. The red brick panel in the center of the building and the brick to the east of the front door would be painted gray. The Paragon Building Existing West Façade 2015 7. A perforated metal screen would be added to the building in front of the brick panel. It would be blue in color and have a diamond pattern with cutouts. 8. A sign, 3’ x 25’ would be painted on the brick, beside of the diamond screen with the words “Fassler Hall”. This sign would be painted in white on the grey background. 9. There would be a fence added to the west side of the building placed on a wood slat base. The fence and base would be 8’ tall. The fence would be a decorative metal fence in a mid- century motif. 10. There would also be a gate installed in the alley on the east side of the building in the decorative mid-century motif. It would not have a wood slat base. The proposal for the west side of the building would keep the following items: 11. The white concrete structural members would be cleaned and repainted white. 12. The existing storefront windows on the west side would be repaired as needed or replaced to match the existing. The Paragon Building Proposed West Façade The west side of the building would have the following changes. 13. The brick would be painted gray. 14. There would be a painted logo on the wall near Capitol Avenue in the first bay of 42 square feet with the diamond blue background with a griffin. 15. Bays two, three, and four would feature glass front overhead doors centered in the bays (number one being closest to Capitol Avenue). The doors are 10’ x 10’. 16. A wood awning is above the overhead doors with 8” letters on the awning. “Sausage, Beer, and Live Music” are considered informational signage per the sign ordinance. 17. A proposed sign of 120 square feet sign (6’ x 20’) is proposed to be painted on the second floor of the building. (The dimensions of this sign are not correct, the building is approximately 150 feet long, the seven bays are approximately 22 feet long each, therefore the sign is approximately 60 feet long and from 6-13 feet high for an area of 540 feet.) 18. 14 new light fixtures will be installed on the building, two per bay. They will be Wheeler Dino Wall Sconce in yellow. They are commercial grade steel with a high gloss porcelain enamel finish. The projection from the building will be 15” or less. 19. The same decorative fence that will be on the front of the building will be extended down the west façade to enclose the outdoor dining and drinking area. 20. The southernmost bays (five through seven) will have the diamond patterned artwork painted on the brick. The proposal for the east side of the building would keep the following items: 21. The white concrete structural members would be cleaned and repainted white. The east side of the building would have the following changes: 22. The brick would be painted gray. The Paragon Building Existing East Façade 2015 The Paragon Building Proposed East Façade 23. Replace the existing overhead door with a 10’ x 10’ glass overhead door. 24. Install three additional 10’ x 10’ glass overhead doors in bays two, three and four (number one being closest to Capitol Avenue.) 25. Install 13 wall sconces as described above. 26. The northernmost bays (one through three) will have the diamond patterned artwork painted on the brick. 27. There is proposed to have a fence at the midpoint of the alley at the rear of the American Legion Building. The Paragon Building was deemed contributing in the last nomination of the district and it should be held to a higher standard than non-contributing ones per the Guidelines. Currently, the building has a single front door in an aluminum storefront system. Changing this to two wooden doors could be reversible in the future. The large panels has four vertical panes of glass now, replacing parts of the two center ones with doors could be appropriate for additional entry and exit from the building. More appropriate doors would be two glass aluminum doors that match the existing door. In light of the additional information from AHPP, Staff is concerned on the removing or covering of original architectural details. In this Structural Expressionist building, the three elements are the white structural members, the rectangular masses of brick and the two-story glass storefront windows. AHPP believes that the mortar was dyed and matched to the brick and that this front façade brick has never been painted. Evidence of paint on the mortar joints is not there. The guidelines state on page 49 that unpainted masonry should not be painted. The sign on the front façade of the building could be installed as metal individual cut letters mounted into the brick as the decorative screen is proposed to be. A different color combination could be used if the red/blue was not found suitable. The sign is quite large and measures differently than labeled. The zoning ordinance states that signs must be less than 10% of the façade. This sign appears to be almost at that maximum. On the east and west façade, it has been painted previously and further painting on these two facades will not diminish the contributing status of the building. Cutting six additional overhead doors into the building may make the building non-contributing in the next survey. Ralph Wilcox, in an email date November 2, 2015, stated “I believe that if the building is renovated and the garage doors are put into the building as proposed, that the project will make the building non-contributing.” Mid Century modern buildings are unique to the district. The guidelines state that fences with street frontages should be 36” tall. The requested fence is 8’ tall. Staff feels that the 8’ tall fence (wood slats and metal decorative fence combined) is too tall to be appropriate. The Guidelines state that fences should be designed with an appropriate style to the building and may be taller with larger scale properties. This is not a larger scale property but the use of a beer garden may prompt a taller fence of four feet total. Other restaurants that serve food an alcohol downtown have three foot fences. The lighting section of the Guidelines reference buildings that were built in the early part of t he 20th century or late 19th century. These mid twentieth century buildings should have appropriate fixtures for their time frame. Staff believes that the proposed light fixtures are of an appropriate design for the buildings. The sign on the front façade of the building measures almost six feet wide by twenty five feet tall. As proposed, the painted sign would be appropriate if the painting of the brick wall behind was appropriate. However, a metal sign with individual cut letters could be appropriate if they were attached into the mortar and stood away from the brick surface. No mention of lighting of the sign was made in the application. The sign on the west wall would be appropriate for materials, but may still be oversized at approximately 540 square feet based on the elevation provided. The size noted is incorrect. It will need to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment since it does not have street frontage. The logo without words on it (diamond shield with griffin) may not be considered a sign. It is 42 square feet. The sign, Fassler Hall, is a sign without street frontage. This sign will require to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Sec. 36-557 (a) All on-premises wall signs must face required street frontage except in complexes where a sign without street frontage would be the only means of identification for a tenant. THE MM EBERTS AMERICAN LEGION BUILDING: The MM Eberts American Legion building is a one story brick building with an entry door and sidelights on the eastern end of the front façade. The front façade is characterized by a raised planter on the western end. The doorway has a ramp leading to it that is entered near the center of the front façade and the retaining wall for the landing and an additional planter is in line with the planter on the west. A decorative cap of brick is a decorative element on the planter and retaining wall. This wall is roughly the height of the finished floor inside. The MM Eberts American Legion Building is not a particularly unique building. Some buildings are of a character that implies that they will be on the contributing list eventually, but this is probably not the case of this building. The American Legion Building Existing North Façade 2015 The American Legion Proposed North Façade The front facade of the building would have the following changes: 1. The brick would be painted gray. There will be accents of orange at the top of the planter wall and green triangles on the western edge of the front façade. 2. The existing storefront entry would be replaced with an overhead door to fit the opening. 3. A new painted welded metal railing would be added on top of the planter wall. 4. The entry ramp would be changed in slope and direction so that the entrance would be on the eastern edge of the building. The planter wall/retaining wall would be cut on the eastern edge and filled in the center. The planter on the western edge would be shortened. 5. A new entrance would be cut into the wall near the western end of the building with two wood doors installed. Doors would be 3’ x 7’ tall. 6. A 3’-0” x 9’-4” storefront window will be added to the center of the building. 7. There is to be a new awning (canopy) over the ramp to the entrance that will be 12” thick and as wide as the distance from the building to the property line. It is to be lined with stained wood soffit and wall paneling. The green edge is to be hard plastic and internally lighted. The soffit is to contain recessed lighting. 8. Above the new double wood doors, an 8’-8” tall vertical wall panel will be installed with corrugated metal face. The sides and top will be green hard plastic and internally lighted. 9. A 2’ tall corrugated parapet will be added atop the wall. 10. 3 light fixtures will be added to the front façade. They will be the same as the other building. They will be Wheeler Dino Wall Sconce in yellow. They are commercial grade steel with a high gloss porcelain enamel finish. The projection from the building will be 15” or less. 11. There would be four signs on the front façade. The first would be the words “Dust Bowl” mounted upright on the fixed awning at the eastern end. In the center of the building, a 3’ x 7’ wall mounted sign will have the text “Dust Bowl lanes and lounge”. On the western edge of the front façade, there will be a neon sign 8’ in diameter that will feature a bowling pin with the words Dust Bowl with a circular motif behind it. The last sign is to be mounted on the existing flagpole that is not dimensioned. The west elevation is a windowless elevation with the north portion of the building overhanging the foundation by about 24 inches. Underneath the overhang are fluorescent tube lights. The American Legion Proposed West Façade The west façade of the building would have the following changes: 12. The brick would be painted gray with green triangles on the north end by Capitol Avenue. A decorative graphic (mural) of a bowling ball and pins would be on the building for the majority of the length of the building. 13. Two glass overhead doors, 10’ x 9’-4”, would be cut into the west façade. They would have painted welded metal railings in front of the overhead doors. (These doors are not at the grade of the alley.) 14. Six additional wall sconces, described above, would be added to the façade. 15. The rear doors with the storefront entry would remain. 16. The graphic of the bowling ball moving toward the pin is a sign without street frontage. This sign will require to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Sec. 36-557 (a) All on-premises wall signs must face required street frontage except in complexes where a sign without street frontage would be the only means of identification for a tenant. The American Legion Building Existing West Façade 2015 17. Drawings have not been submitted for the east or south façade of the building. It is assumed by staff that it will be painted grey to match the remainder of the building. The MM Eberts American Legion building is non-contributing to the district as of the last nomination. The American Legion building was built with the one door with sidelights. The guidelines state that additional doors should not be added to the primary façade. With this being a non- contributing building, this could be an appropriate change. The guidelines state that brick that has not been painted before should not be painted. This brick appears to be able to withstand weather and is not mismatched. When the planter wall is cut and infilled, it may not be possible to reuse the brick or match it with new brick. Later mortar is more difficult to remove from brick in an effort to reuse them. Currently, the proposal is to paint both buildings gray. With the Paragon building front façade recommended to be left unpainted, and it is desired for both buildings to match, then a suggestion would be to paint the Eberts building to match the Paragon Building. Reutilizing the existing brick to fill voids in the planter wall would be the best solution and not requiring the brick to be painted. There is a fence proposed to be in the former alley area between the two buildings. This would be a gate in all probability. The guidelines state that fences with street frontages should be 36” tall. The requested fence is 8’ tall. Staff feels that the 8’ tall fence (wood slats and metal decorative fence combined) is too tall to be appropriate. The Guidelines state that fences should be designed with an appropriate style to the building and may be taller with larger scale properties. This is not a larger scale property but the use of a beer garden may prompt a taller fence of four feet total. Other restaurants that serve food an alcohol downtown have three foot fences. The lighting section of the Guidelines reference buildings that were built in the early part of the 20th century or late 19th century. These mid twentieth century buildings should have appropriate fixtures for their time frame. Staff believes that the proposed light fixtures are of an appropriate design for the buildings. The proposal is for four signs on the front of the building. From the left (east side), the first is the 2’ tall metal letters mounted to the top of the canopy. This would be about 24 square feet. The second is a wall sign noted to be 3’x7 but scales approximately 16’x5' for 80 square feet. The third, a wall sign with the bowing pin on it, is labeled 8’ in diameter for about 70 square feet. The last sign is on the existing flagpole. This zoning ordinance for this UU zoned land states that freestanding signs (the sign on t he flagpole) my not to exceed six feet in height, including pole. This sign is clearly taller than six feet. Staff feels that four signs on this façade is too much signage. Staff believes that the two Proposed Wall sconce for both buildings signs on opposite ends of the building (the large neon wall sign and the metal sign on top of the canopy) would be sufficient. SUMMARY In conclusion, concerning the Paragon Building, the guidelines state that Contributing buildings will be held to a higher standard than those that are non-contributing. More appropriate doors would be two glass aluminum doors that match the existing door although the wood doors are a reversible change. The guidelines state that unpainted brick should not be painted. The signage could be executed in a manner similar to the metal screen and still achieve as similar desired look. The signage would be large, if not the largest permanent sign in the district if approved. Cutting an additional six overhead doors into the building could make the building non-contributing, but is a reversible alteration. The guidelines state that fences with street frontages should be 36” tall and the requested fence is more than twice that tall. Concerning the American Legion Building, it is a non-contributing building and is not held to the high standard of contributing buildings. Adding additional doors could be an appropriate change with this non-contributing status. The guidelines state that unpainted brick should not be painted. With the Paragon building front façade recommended to be left unpainted, and it is desired for both buildings to match, then a suggestion would be to paint the Eberts building to match the Paragon Building. The guidelines state that fences with street frontages should be 36” tall and the requested fence is more than twice that tall. Four signs may be too many for the building. 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 building permit for each property. 2. Paragon Building: a. Do not paint brick on front (north) façade, b. Sign on front (north) façade to be individual cut metal letters mounted into the mortar joints. c. Reduce size of sign on front (north) façade by 25%. d. Reduce height of fence to 4’ including wood slats. e. Sign on West façade to be reviewed by BOA. 3. American Legion Building a. Reduce height of all fences to 4’. b. Reduce number of signs to two. Remove sign on flagpole and smaller wall mounted sign. COMMISSION ACTION: December 14, 2015 Brian Minyard, Staff, made a presentation to the Commission about the item outlining the recommendations and conditions. It was confirmed that the item would be broken into two parts with each building discussed independently with a separate vote. The Paragon Building was discussed first. Mr. Minyard noted that there were no comments from citizens on this project. He continued and reviewed the conditions for approval. Commissioner Page Wilson wanted to clarify that this building had an addition to it. Mr. Minyard stated that the addition to the building had achieved contributing status on its own merits and that the entirety of the building was contributing. Chair Toni Johnson asked when Dietrich Neyland worked here. Mr. Minyard stated that he could not state for sure. She had a question on the email from AHPP. Chair Johnson read from the email of Ralph Wilcox that stated that the installation of the garage doors would make the building be non-contributing to the district. His entire email was quoted in the staff report. Commissioner Jennifer Carman questioned the staff recommendation on the fence concerning the height of the wood slats and metal or just the metal portion. Mr. Minyard stated that it was the total height of the fence, including the wood that was recommended to be at 4’ tall. There was a discussion on what would officially trigger the evaluation of the building to deem it non-contributing, if buildings that had been modified to become non-contributing ever became contributing again, and tax credit work that has made non-contributing buildings contributing. Commissioner Wilson stated that being contributing is a factor and that it could be deemed contributing again. Chair Johnson said that Ralph Wilcox is the man at AHPP that is the National Register staff person. The determination of non-contributing status will not be determined until another survey for the entire district is performed or until someone asked for that specific building to be reviewed. It could be modified to a non-contributing status without the official non-contributing status catching up with it. Jimmy Moses, Moses Tucker Real Estate, representing the applicant, stated that he has been working with Central Arkansas Water, CAW, the owner of the property. Capitol Avenue has deteriorated over the years. This building has been used for storage for many years. He spoke of a late 50’s or early 60’s addition. He stated he knew Dietrich Neyland. This building is being developed as a companion to the American Legion building. It is oriented to a commercial street and there are issues with the bus transfer station. They have closed the alley with CAW approval earlier in the year. CAW is interested in making this happen, not as definite as to the Legion Building. Mr. Moses continued that in general they would like to try to conform to the Staff report. He did want to discuss the side overhead doors. The east and west sides were not designed to be seen. They probably abutted other buildings. The tenant must have openings to access the beer garden areas. Commissioner Becky Pekar asked about parking. Mr. Moses responded that there is no provision for parking. She asked if they could use the CAW lot. Mr. Moses stated that it may be an option. Chair Johnson stated this building is listed was eligible in the district. It is not individually listed, but counts as a Contributing structure to the district. Mr. Moses is talking about the less important elevations to the buildings. The doors could be reversible by filling in the brick at a later date. Chair Johnson said that it was a big step to go from Contributing to Non- Contributing. She stated her opinion that she believes it should be non-contributing even though the paperwork may not show it immediately. Commissioner Jeremiah Russell stated that the possibility of delisting was a deal breaker for him. But he thought it would be a significant improvement for the area. He felt that the fence was too tall. The solid wood doors were not appropriate and adding another door was inappropriate. He referred to the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation numbers 2, 4 and 9. He could support it if the building was not contributing. Mr. Moses stated he was generally okay with the Staff recommendations. The current structure was a non-contributing force in the neighborhood. He is trying to add energy and life into the area. Commissioner Russell asked him if he would consider deferring till next mo nth. Mr. Moses said yes that he would. There was a discussion and since Commissioner Russell asked for the deferral, the bylaws state that the City will send out the notices. Mr. Minyard asked the applicant to resubmit new drawings to then send out to the commissioners. The applicant said that they could. Commissioner Russell asked for Staff to meet with the AHPP. Chair Johnson commented that the drawings show the beams and columns to be painted. She did not believe that the columns, beams, or the front elevation had ever been painted. She stated that the notes need to be pulled off for the painting the brick. She referred to the treatment of original materials section of the Guidelines and suggested that the applicants look at that. James Sullivan, AMR Architects, stated that after further research, he thought three of the four elevations had been painted. Chair Johnson was grateful for Mr. Moses’ work downtown and that it would be an addition for economic development. The contributing non-contributing question is a no go for her. Mr. Sullivan suggested that all should look at the stucco columns in more detail. Commissioner Russell made a motion to defer the item at 307 Capitol Avenue to the January agenda. Vice Chair Bowen seconded and the motion passes with 7 ayes and 0 noes. The review of 315 E Capitol Avenue started at this point. Brian Minyard, Staff, made a presentation to the commission including staff recommendations. A letter C will need to be added to the staff recommendations to have the signage reviewed by the BOA. Commissioner Becky Pekar commented on the removal of the sign under the canopy and a discussion was held on why the staff recommendation was as it is. There was a discussion on whether a company designed flag with their logo and name was a sign or not. A question for the Staff was if the neon sign was internally lit. Mr. Minyard stated that if the neon tubes were exposed, it was not an internally lit sign. The green panel that is internally lit was not considered a sign. Commissioner Jeremiah Russell stated that lighting should not use visible bulbs and quoted from the guidelines. It should not use external bulbs. Mr. Minyard, when asked, stated that the Staff did not feel that a neon sign would be inappropriate for this non-contributing building in the district. He stated that the guidelines are guidelines and not the ordinance. Chair Toni Johnson stated that a non-contributing building will be held to a lesser standard for signage. Commissioner Page Wilson said that neon was a historic material and he has no problem with the neon on the signage. He likes moving signs, but not LED. Chair Johnson suggested to look at the context, the neon is not going into residential windows. Jimmy Moses, the applicant, said that this was part of the Village at Legion Row development. They are back for review of this property now that they have a user. It will be a retro bowling alley with 10 lanes and a food and beverage operation. It is designed to be retro and funky. Hopefully there latitude is there since it is non-contributing. The colors of the building are grey and green and would like to continue the color scheme on both buildings. Mr. Moses wants a significant fence in the alley. He does not want anyone jumping over a 3 to 4 foot tall fence. He reminded the Commission that they had approved a 6’ fence last time at the Legion Village. Commissioner Russell stated that this Commission does not set precedence. He asked if they would reduce the fence to 6’. Mr. Moses said that they were trying to avoid afterhours access to the alley area. Chair Johnson asked if Mr. Moses was officially amending his application for six foot fence everywhere. He stated yes. Commission Page Wilson stated that it looks like an Edward Durrell Stone midcentury fence. James Sullivan, AMR Architects, stated that the gate would be operable with a metal fence. The motif would be translated into metal in the same style as shown. Commissioner Pekar commented on the signs. “Lanes and Lounge” is text found on the sign that is being discussed to be removed. Did they want that text on another sign? It was discussed and the sign “Dust Bowl” on the canopy will be redesigned to include that text. The sign under the canopy will be removed. The sign on the flag was discussed. It was planned to be a fabric flag with the logo on the fabric. There was a discussion between Staff and the Commission on whether it constituted a sign. Mr. Minyard stated that he would check on it and get back to them. Frank Barksdale, AMR Architects, stated that if it was a sign, they would just fly an US flag instead. They are asking to paint the building and keep the sign of the bowling pin. There was no citizen comment. Commissioner Russell made a motion to approve with the following amendments: 1. Reduce alley fence height from 8’ to 6’ in the style portrayed in metal. 2. Remove the center sign under the canopy. 3. Far left sign will add the text “Lanes and Lounge”. 4. If the flag is deemed to be a sign, they will fly another flag that is not deemed to be a sign. 5. Have review from the BOA for the west wall sign for a sign without street frontage. Vice Chair Bowen seconded and the motion passed with a vote of 7 ayes and 0 noes. STAFF UPDATE: January 11, 2016 On the 315 E Capitol Avenue issue of whether an organizational flag is a sign, according to the zoning code Sec. 36-550. Signs permitted in all zones: The following signs are permitted in all zones: # (6) One (1) company or organizational flag, not to exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area that can be displayed from a permanently mounted flag pole. The motion stated that if it is deemed to be a flag, they will fly another flag that is not deemed to be a sign. Sec 36- 534. Exemptions: This chapter does not relate to building design. This chapter does not regulate # (6) Flag of any nation, government, or non-commercial organization. Therefore, the applicant may fly a flag of any nation, government, or non-commercial organization and be in compliance with the motion passed. The Sanborn maps were checked for adjacent buildings for three time periods: 1913, 1939 and 1939-1950. The three lots at the corner of Cumberland and Capitol (where the Paragon Building and the Police building are) were vacant in 1913 as well as1939. Only in 1939-1950 map does the current building show, along with “auto parking” to the west. The original 1947 building is not shown, only the addition which is reflected in the 1939-1950 maps. The lot to the west was never built upon as far as Staff knows until the Police built a building on the corner in 2005. The west façade of the building has been visible from the street from the time of construction until 2005 when it was partially hidden but the police building. 1913 Sanborn map 1939 Sanborn map 1939-50 Sanborn map The applicant provided Staff with new drawings on December 21, 2015 as requested. There are changes to the application as requested. The analysis below has the new changes in bold letters and the deletions struck deletions struck. The analysis follows: The proposal for the front of the building would keep the following items: 28. The white concrete structural members would be cleaned and repainted white. 29. The existing storefront windows on the west side would be repaired as needed or replaced to match the existing. The proposal for the front of the building would change the following items: 30. The single aluminum storefront door would be replaced with two wood doors two aluminum storefront doors (3’x8'). 31. A 2’ x 7’ stained and painted carved wood sign would be placed over the new wood doors aluminum storefront doors. 32. A 12” thick wood awning with recessed lights in the soffit would be added over the front doors at the level of the beam between the first and second floor. 33. The red brick panel in the center of the building and the brick to the east of the front door would be painted gray will not be painted. 34. A perforated metal screen would be added to the building in front of the brick panel. It would be blue in color and have a diamond pattern with cutouts. 35. A sign, varying from 5’-3” to 3’-0” by x 22’8”’ would be painted on the brick wall mounted metal cut letters painted white, beside of the diamond screen with the words “Fassler Hall”. This sign would be painted in white on the grey background. 36. The brickwork on the front of the building will be cleaned and repaired as necessary. 37. There would be a fence added to the west side of the building placed on a wood slat base. The fence and base would be 8’ 6’-0” tall. The fence would be a decorative metal fence in a mid-century motif. 38. There would also be a gate installed in the alley on the east side of the building in the decorative mid-century motif. It would not have a wood slat base. It will be 6’-0” tall. The proposal for the west side of the building would keep the following items: 39. The white concrete structural members would be cleaned and repainted white. 40. The existing storefront windows on the west side would be repaired as needed or replaced to match the existing. The west side of the building would have the following changes. 41. The brick would be painted gray. 42. There would be a painted logo on the wall near Capitol Avenue in the first bay of 42 49 square feet with the diamond blue background with a griffin. 43. Bays two, three, and four three, four and five would feature glass front overhead doors 10’- 0” tall by 12’-0” wide sliding doors centered in the bays (number one being closest to Capitol Avenue). The doors are 10’ x 10’. 44. A wood awning is above the overhead doors with 8” letters on the awning. “Sausage, Beer, and Live Music” are considered informational signage per the sign ordinance. The Paragon Building Proposed North Facade 2016 45. A proposed sign, Fassler Hall, of 120 square feet sign (6’ x 20’) 413 square feet is proposed to be painted on the second floor of the building. (The dimensions of this sign are not correct, the building is approximately 150 feet long, the seven bays are approximately 22 feet long each, therefore the sign is approximately 60 feet long and from 6-13 feet high for an area of 540 feet.) See signage sheet for new dimensions. 46. 14 new light fixtures will be installed on the building, two per bay. They will be Wheeler Dino Wall Sconce in yellow. They are commercial grade steel with a high gloss porcelain enamel finish. The projection from the building will be 15” or less. 47. The same decorative fence that will be on the front of the building will be extended down the west façade to enclose the outdoor dining and drinking area. 48. The southernmost bays (five through seven) will have the diamond patterned artwork painted on the brick. The Paragon Building Proposed West Façade 2016 The Paragon Building Proposed East Façade 2016 The proposal for the east side of the building would keep the following items: 49. The white concrete structural members would be cleaned and repainted white. The east side of the building would have the following changes: 50. The brick would be painted gray. 51. Replace the existing overhead door with a 10’ x 10’ glass overhead door. 52. Install three additional 10’ x 10’ glass overhead doors in bays two, three and four three, four and five (number one being closest to Capitol Avenue.) 53. Install 13 wall sconces as described above. 54. The northernmost bays (one through three) will have the diamond patterned artwork painted on the brick. 55. There is proposed to have a fence at the midpoint of the alley at the rear of the American Legion Building. The applicants have met most of the recommendations and suggestions in the previous Staff report including the changes to the front doors, not painting the front façade, and changing the signage and screen on the front so that the original masonry is preserved. The fence height has been amended from 8’ to 6’ in the December hearing. Staff met with AHPP representatives and the applicants in December at the AHPP offices. As a result of that meeting, Staff received the following email. Missy McSwain is the Director of the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. See entirety of email on last page. Dear Brian: This email addresses earlier comments made by AHPP staff regarding a potential change in the contributing status of the Paragon Building at 301 Capitol Avenue in the MacArthur Park National Register Historic District. We were concerned with the proposed alterations to the West façade of the building. As you know, a meeting was held in my office December 17 between project developers, architects, and AHPP staff. After discussion, revised plans that move the openings one bay to the South (or back) of the building and re-design the door system were submitted for our review. There are seven brick bay areas in the West elevation divided by structural columns covered with stucco. The earlier plans showed 10’ x 10’ wall openings with an overhead door system in the second, third and fourth bay. The modified plans show the openings in the third, fourth and fifth bays slightly wider (10’ x 12’) and using sliding glass doors instead of the overhead doors. With these revisions, we have determined that the building will not become non-contributing to the district. Should you have further questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. Best, Missy In conclusion, concerning the Paragon Building, the guidelines state that Contributing buildings will be held to a higher standard than those that are non-contributing. Staff feels that the applicant has worked with Staff and the AHPP Staff to produce a better project that conforms to the spirit of the ordinance. The Legion Building was approved in the December meeting; therefore, the recommendation below is only for the Paragon Building. 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 building permit for each property. 2. Paragon Building: a. Sign on West façade to be reviewed by BOA. COMMISSION ACTION: January 11, 2016 Brian Minyard made a presentation as to the changes to the submittals and to the email from AHPP stating that the building would not be listed as non-contributing with the revised proposed changes. Commissioner Toni Johnson asked how the metal checkerboard was going to be attached to the wall. Frank Barksdale said that it would be attached in the mortar joints with standoffs. Commissioner Page Wilson asked if they were painting the building. James Sullivan said that they were painting three elevations, but not the front. Commissioner Wilson asked if he could talk about the metal screen on the front of the building. Mr. S ullivan said it would be custom fabricated. Commissioner Johnson said that she was glad that they went to AHPP and discussed their project. Commissioner Jerimiah Russell made a motion to approve 307 Capitol Avenue as submitted with staff recommendations. Commissioner Jennifer Carman seconded and the motion was approved with 7 ayes and 0 noes. Other Matters Preservation Plan Implementation update Mr. Minyard stated that they will be having another meeting this Friday. They will be talking about additional local ordinance districts. The location will be at the Sister Cities Conference room in City Hall. Enforcement issues Staff had none to report to the Commission. Certificates of Compliance A spreadsheet was ernailed to the Commission earlier. The spreadsheet also has the COAs, so the commissioners see both. Guidelines Revision The Staff spoke of planning for the tour. Ellen Harris from Savannah Georgia will be the speaker. There was a desire to have her and Dan Carey at the tour. Commissioner Toni Johnson explained how she was chosen to lead the tour. Commissioner Wilson asked to have the tour before the next meeting. Citizen Communication There were no citizens that chose to speak during citizen communication. Adjournment There was a motion to adjourn and the meeting ended at 5:25 p.m. Attest: Chair Anz-er Secretary /Staff "'�_ L� \ Date - ( - � Date Page 24 of 24