HDC_10 12 2015Page 1 of 10
LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
Monday, October 12, 2015, 5:00 p.m.
Board Room, City Hall
I. Roll Call
Quorum was present being seven (7) in number.
Members Present: Toni Johnson
BJ Bowen
Page Wilson (arrived after minutes)
Jennifer Carman
Jeremiah Russell
Rebecca Pekar
Dick Kelley
Members Absent: none
City Attorney: Debra Weldon
Staff Present: Brian Minyard
Citizens Present: Rich Wiebe
Tim Zimmerman
Jane Green
Darwin Buehler
II. Approval of Minutes
A motion was made by Vice Chair BJ Bowen to approve the minutes of September 14, 2015 as
submitted. Commissioner Dick Kelley seconded and the minutes were approved with a vote of
6 ayes and 1 absent (Wilson).
Notice requirements were met on both applications to be heard tonight.
III. Deferred Certificates of Appropriateness
None
IV. Certificates of Appropriateness
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
Page 2 of 10
DATE: October 12, 2015
APPLICANT: Darwin Buehler, Image360 - Little Rock
ADDRESS: 200 East 13th
COA REQUEST: Additional sign
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 200 E 13th Street. The
property’s legal description is “Lot 6 and the south 1/5 of
Lot 5, Blok 22, Original City of Little Rock, Pulaski
County, Arkansas."
This office building was built in 1955. The 2006 survey
form states: “This standard 20th Century Commercial
structure has expressed columns and beams with solid
and transparent walls independent of structure. Built for
Price Chiropractic in 1955.” It is considered a
"Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic
District.
This application is to install one additional sign on the
west façade of the building approximately six square feet.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On September 9, 2013, a COA was issued for signage.
On May 5, 2002, an administrative approval was issued to install a new roof.
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. One.
Location of Project
Page 3 of 10
Existing West elevation Contributing and Non-contributing map
PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN AN ALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT
AND GUIDELINES:
On page 63 of the current Guidelines, they state:
“E. SIGNS
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.”
Page 4 of 10
Elevation of Building with sign superimposed.
The proposed sign, at 22” by 36” is almost six
square feet in size. This sign, attached to the
building, does not cover or obscure
architectural features. Staff believes that
aluminum sign material is appropriate for the
age of this structure. The sign will not have any
additional lighting on it. The submission states
that the sign is “…aligned right under the
existing sign constructed of aluminum DiBond
(MaxMetal) with laminated, full color print
affixed to building with stainless steel screws
anchored into mortar.”
There are currently three signs on the building, one on each of the following facades: west,
south and north. The signs are identical.
The cover letter states that “First Drug Choice Testing is required as a pain management
solutions provided to display the logo of Ameritox on their signage and advertising”.
Staff believes that the sign is an appropriate size and location on 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 a sign permit.
COMMISSION ACTION: October 14, 2015
Brian Minyard, Staff, made a brief presentation to the Commission.
Vice Chair BJ Bowen made it public that he knows Darwin Buehler but he has no financial
interest in this application. Debra Weldon, of the City Attorney’s office, stated that there is no
conflict of interest if there is no financial interest on Commissioner Bowen’s part.
Detail of Sign
Page 5 of 10
Commissioner Page Wilson entered the room.
Tim Zimmerman, the owner of First Choice, stated that they had entered into an agreement with
Ameritox that required them to have signage. The customers need to be able to verify that this
is the building where they need to be for the urine collection. They have asked for one sign on
the Scott Street side. They have Ameritox signage inside now.
Commissioner Dick Kelley asked what kind of clients were there, is this a walkup? Mr.
Zimmerman stated that employers used their services, for drug testing and pain management
urine testing, etc.
Commissioner Jeremiah Russell asked why they have not considered more traditional signage
off of the building for more visibility. Mr. Zimmerman stated that he thought signs on poles were
not available to him. Commissioner Russell stated that they were available and shown in the
Guidelines.
Mr. Minyard spoke of the first application of the First Choice signs and stated that he b elieved it
was an enforcement issue. They had installed the signs before the approval was given by the
HDC. Mr. Zimmerman stated that was correct. Mr. Minyard stated that in an after the fact COA
type application, he could see where the different types of signs would not have been discussed
since the signs were already in place. He did say that it is an option to do so. Mr. Minyard does
not remember a conversation of what types of signs are available. The Commission reviews
what has been presented to you. The item is a wall sign. If the applicant wanted a different
sign, they could defer for a month to do so. Mr. Zimmerman is not sure exactly why he thought
that.
Chair Toni Johnson asked the applicant if they wanted to go ahead. Mr. Zimmerman stated that
they did. There were no citizens that wanted to speak on the issue.
Vice Chair Bowen made a motion to approve the signage with condition of obtaining a sign
permit. Commissioner Becky Pekar seconded and the motion passed with a vote of 6 ayes and
1 no (Russell).
Page 6 of 10
DATE: October 12, 2015
APPLICANT: Jane Green
ADDRESS: 624 Ferry Street
COA REQUEST: Addition of Storage shed in rear yard
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 624 Ferry Street. The
property’s legal description is “Part of Lot 7, Block 2
Stevenson’s Addition, Pulaski County, Arkansas."
This single family building was built around 1900. The
2006 survey form states: “A Colonial Revival style house
with Craftsman porch. Round window in pediment and
wide trim board at wall/overhang junction are typical as is
decorative mullion treatment at front window.” It is
considered a "Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur
Park Historic District.
This application is for the Addition of Storage shed in rear
yard. This will be a pre-manufactured Tuff Shed storage
building Pro Ranch style 8’ x 10’ size.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
No previous actions were on this site were located with a
search of the files.
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. Two.
Location of Project
Page 7 of 10
Google Street view of east elevation Google Street view of south elevation
Brochure of shed Contributing and Non-contributing map
PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT
AND GUIDELINES:
This application is for the addition of a storage shed in the back yard of 624 Ferry Street. This is
an item on the HDC agenda because of its visibility from 7th Street. As stated in the cover
letter, the shed will house lawn and
garden equipment. It will be painted
the color of the house with a roof
that also matches the house.
The guidelines state on page 55
state the following under B. New
Construction of Primary and
Secondary Buildings:
“New construction of primary
and secondary buildings
should maintain, not disrupt,
the existing pattern of
surrounding historic buildings
in the neighborhood. Although
they should blend with
adjacent buildings, they
Survey with location of proposed shed in red.
Page 8 of 10
should not be too imitative of historic styles so that they may be distinguished from
historic buildings. (Note: A new building becomes too imitative through application
of historic architectural decoration, such as gingerbread, vergeboards, dentils, fish-
scale shingles, etc. These kinds of details are rarely successful on a new building.
They fail to be accurate, usually too small and disproportionate versions of authentic
ones, and should be avoided.)
New construction of secondary structures, such as garages or other outbuildings,
should be smaller in scale than the primary building; should be simple in design but
reflect the general character of the primary building; should be located as traditional
for the neighborhood (near the alley instead of close to or attached to the primary
structure); and should be compatible in design, form, materials, and roof shape.
1. Building Orientation:
The façade of the new building should be aligned with the established setbacks of
the area. Side and rear setbacks common to the neighborhood should be upheld.
2. Building Mass and Scale:
New buildings should appear similar in mass and scale with historic structures in the
area. This includes height and width.
3. Building Form
Basic building forms and roof shapes, including pitch, which match those used
historically in the area should be used. Location and proportions of entrances,
windows, divisional bays, and porches are important. Also consider heights
(foundation, floor-to-ceiling, porch height and depth.)
4. Building Materials
Building materials that are similar to those used historically for major surfaces in the
area should be used. Materials for roofs should be similar in appearance to those
used historically. New materials may be used if their appearances are similar to
those of the historic building materials. Examples of acceptable new building
materials are cement fiber board, which has the crisp dimensions of wood and can
be painted, and standing seam metal roofs, preferably finished with a red or dark
color.
Finishes similar to others in the district should be used. If brick, closely match mortar
and brick colors. If frame, match lap dimensions with wood or composite materials,
not vinyl or aluminum siding.
Details and textures should be similar to those in the neighborhood (trim around
doors, windows and eaves; watercourses; corner boards; eave depths, etc.)”
The proposed storage shed will be placed in the rear yard as is historically accurate for these
type buildings. It will be placed five feet off the property line in each direction which meets
zoning setback. The building will be oriented with the openings to the south to the bulk of the
yard. The building, at 8’x10’, is definitely smaller in scale to the house and will be less than 10’
tall. The shed will have a pitched gable roof with door and windows that will face the street.
Building materials will feature wood trim, wood siding and asphalt roof shingles.
Page 9 of 10
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there was one
comment regarding this application in support.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
2. Obtaining a building permit.
COMMISSION ACTION: October 12, 2015
Brian Minyard, Staff, made a brief presentation to the Commission.
Jane Green, the owner of the property, stated that her house was 102 years old and it did not
have any storage for outdoor tools and that she desired to have a spot for those. She is now
using a sun room for that storage. She is asking for a light grey painted wood shed to match the
house.
Commissioner Dick Kelley asked if it was pre fab and on a slab. She stated they would build it
on site and it was not on a slab.
Commissioner Jeremiah Russell asked if it was wood siding. Ms. Green stated she is buying if
from the Tuff Shed franchise and that it appears to be solid wood siding. Commissioner Russell
commented on the door being on the short end. There was a discussion that the survey shows
the shed to be oriented the opposite direction. Mr. Minyard stated that it could meet setbacks
with slightly less setback from the apartment building. The desire is to have the door and
window to face Seventh Street. Commissioner Russell was concerned that the shed would wall
off the view of the street for the neighbor to the north. She said that the priest that lives in the
house is in agreement with the shed. Ms. Green commented that she has never seen her
neighbors in the back yard.
Chair Johnson stated that she was uncomfortable voting on the shed without knowing exactly
what the siding was. Mr. Minyard read what the guidelines state on secondary buildings for
materials and stated that the Staff did not have any heartburn when it was discussed about the
fact that it might be wood or a product that looks like wood.
Commissioner Russell stated he was concerned with not having lap siding on the shed. He
thinks it deserves a closer attention to the details. Commissioner Wilson stated that new
construction should be separated from the house and that the shed should look of today, not
102 years old. A wood composite shed is okay.
Commissioner Pekar asked Ms. Green if the siding could be changed, if maybe something
could be custom built. Commissioner Russell stated that shiplap siding would look more like
that house. Commissioner Pekar stated that it is in the rear yard, will be painted the same color,
and probably will not be that noticeable.
A motion was made by vice Chair Bowen to approve the shed at 624 Ferry with the condition of
obtaining a building permit. The second was by Commissioner Jennifer Carman. The motion
passed with a vote of 6 ayes and 1 no (Russell).
There was a note to the record that the survey will need to be corrected before the permit is
issued. The shed was drawn in the wrong orientation.
V. Other Matters
Preservation Plan Implementation update
The committee met and talked about the presentation in front of the City Board that will happen
tomorrow night. There was a meeting with the presenters and the City Manager Bruce Moore.
At the next meeting, there will be a debriefing of sort of the presentation to the Board and set
plans of what to do next.
Enforcement issues
The sign at 506 Ferry did not file as expected. Staff will call them and make sure that they are
on the next agenda. Mr. Minyard spoke with the business owner, the landlord in northwest
Arkansas and to the representative. They know they have to file for the application.
Certificates of Compliance
Staff did not write any COCs this month.
There was a request to include the election of officers on the December agenda.
Citizen Communication
There were no citizens that chose to speak during citizen communication.
Guidelines Revision
Chair Toni Johnson asked the Commission to suspend talk on the Guidelines until some
additional training is done. She is still trying to work on a tour and that we may have to ask for a
grant extension with training through AHPP's CLG program. Mr. Minyard stated that he has
tentatively reserved the training room for 2:00 for the day of the next meeting. That would be for
November 9" for CLG training. There was a motion to suspend the discussion of the guidelines
and the motion passed 7 ayes and 0 noes.
Commissioner Wilson asked who was doing the training. Chair Johnson is working towards
Vanessa McKuin and Cheri Nichols for the tour and Catherine Barrier for the AHPP training.
The tour would end at Studio Main and Rhea Roberts QQA would have a presentation at the
end. This would be a walking or bus tour of the area. Mr. Minyard said that he could work on a
city vehicle for the tour.
Adjournment
There was a motion to adjourn and the meeting ended at 5:50 p.m.
Attest:
f)',Nf A AA----)
air
& AJ
Secretary /Staff
Date
12,- [�- I S
Date
Page 10 of 10