HDC_06 11 2012 1 of 10
LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
Monday, June 11, 2102, 5:00 p.m.
Board Room, City Hall
I. Roll Call
Quorum was present being six (6) in number.
Members Present: Julie Wiedower
Loretta Hendrix
Chris Vanlandingham
BJ Bowen
Toni Johnson
Mark Brown
Members Absent: Randy Ripley
City Attorney: Debra Weldon
Staff Present: Brian Minyard
Citizens Present: Page Wilson
Jason Stepp
John Sullivan
II. Approval of Minutes
A motion was made to defer the minutes of May 2012 for further editing by
Commissioner Julie Wiedower. Commissioner BJ Bowen seconded and the motion
was passed with a vote of 6 ayes and 1 absent.
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
2 of 10
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. One.
DATE: June 11, 2012
APPLICANT: Page Wilson, Paul Page Dwellings
ADDRESS: 1418 Rock Street
COA REQUEST: New Infill House
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 1418 Rock Street. The
property’s legal description is “Lot 8R, Block 49, Original
City of City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas."
This is currently a vacant lot. The house was removed in
2000 as a result of the 1999 tornado.
This application is for a New Infill House with detached
garage.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On May 9, 2011, a COA was issued to David Anderson &
Allison Vandever for construction of a house (which was
never built).
On August 5, 1999, a COA was filed for the repair of the
roof after the tornado. The COA was not granted due to
lack of information.
On January 6, 2000, a COA was granted for demolition to
Raymond Rogers.
Montage of street view
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
Location of Project
3 of 10
PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT
AND GUIDELINES: The Guidelines state on page 63:
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 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.
4 of 10
Details and textures should be similar to those in the neighborhood (trim around
doors, windows and eaves; watercourses; corner boards; eave depths, etc.)
This new construction of primary and secondary buildings maintains, and does not disrupt, the
existing pattern of surrounding historic buildings in the neighborhood. This proposed house
blends with adjacent buildings, and is not too imitative of historic styles so that it is distinguished
from historic buildings.
1. BUILDING ORIENTATION:
The front setback of the proposed house is at the same setback as the other new structures on
each side of it and is similar to the historic structures on the block face. Side setbacks are
consistent to the historic and new structures on the block face. These are compatible with the
district and within zoning parameters.
2. BUILDING MASS AND SCALE:
The proposed house appears similar in mass and scale with the single family houses on the
block face. This includes both height and width. The width of the front façade is just under 36
feet wide and the height is just under 20 feet. This is the same height as the shotgun house to
the north and less than the house to the south.
While not typical, the shape and arrangement of the structures are compatible with the
surrounding buildings.
3. BUILDING FORM:
This house features an internal courtyard and a detached garage in the rear. The front portion
of the house (master bedroom suite and entry hall) is reminiscence of a small cottage. The roof
pitch is 12/12 and is similar to the two houses to the north. This house utilizes side-gabled roof
forms. The detached garage will feature front and rear gables.
Front (east) and north facade South façade showing courtyard
The entry door is off-centered and surrounded by ganged windows (two in the entry and three in
the master bedroom.) The front door is recessed in a small porch area and will be less than
three feet above grade. The steps extend past the front façade of the house. Handrails will not
be installed. The porch and steps will be constructed of wood.
The front third of the house does not feature any windows on the sides of the structure. The
lack of windows on the north and south façade is not compatible with the district. Homes in the
area feature windows on all sides of the structures, not just in the courtyard areas. A window
5 of 10
will need to be installed on both the north and south elevations of the front structure on the
eastern half of the wall at least 3’ x 5’ vertical in size.
The foundation of the house will be 24” tall at the front and will be plain concrete block. The
house will have 8’ ceilings on the main floor. (There is a loft in the rear of the house above the
second bedroom.)
The windows will be Anderson windows, wood with white vinyl cladding. The windows on the
front of the house will be 24x53 inches with 24x17” awning windows below. The door will be an
Anderson 36” Glass slab front door with white vinyl cladding.
4. BUILDING MATERIALS:
The siding on the house will be Hardie Board 8” smooth lap siding in a horizontal pattern. This
will result in a 7 1/4 inch reveal. The corner boards and trim around the windows and doors will
be 4 inch Hardie Board trim with a smooth finish. This material is similar in appearance to the
materials used historically.
The roof will be a metal corrugated roof, like the shotgun house to the north. It will be
Galvalume 3/4” corrugated roofing on a 12/12 pitch roof with 18” overhangs.
Exterior lighting will be Westinghouse Craftsman nickel finish. One will be placed on each side
of the front door and on each side of the garage door. Light fixture shown on page 7.
Gutters will be Galvalume half-round. Downspouts will be on each end of the front façade. Two
downspouts will be on the north façade at the bottom of the valleys. Addition gutters will be
located where they will not be seen from the street.
5. SITE FIXTURES:
Fencing will enclose the courtyard and extend south to the property lines from the house and
meets with adjacent properties fence. This “pallet fence’
will match the adjacent properties fence. It will be
constructed of 1x4’s mounted horizontally. Fence is to be
a maximum of 6 feet in height or will be subject to a
review by the Board of Adjustment. The location of the
fence is slightly less than one-half the way back from the
front portion of the house.
A concrete walk to the structure from the city sidewalk will
be 4 feet wide. The driveway in the rear will be a 12 feet
wide gravel drive.
Air conditioner condensing units will be placed inside the courtyard and in the backyard.
The gas meter is scheduled to be placed on the north façade.
A satellite dish is requested to be installed on the rear of the house on the southwest corner
roof.
The garages is smaller in scale than the primary building; is simple in design and reflects the
general character of the primary building; is located as traditional for the neighborhood (near the
Proposed Fence
6 of 10
alley instead of close to or attached to the primary structure); and is compatible in design, form,
materials, and roof shape.
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. Addition of two windows as stated above. Submittal of final window design to Staff. If
windows are significantly different than those approved by the commission, a separate
hearing may be required to approve the windows.
COMMISSION ACTION: June 11, 2012
Debra Weldon, City Attorney’s office, stated that notices were not sent with a return receipt
requested. The requirement for notices to be sent had not been met and the commission could
not hear the item until notices had been met. The notices had been sent certified mail, but not
return receipt requested.
There was a dialogue between Page Wilson the applicant and Brian Minyard about when the
error was discovered. Mr. Minyard stated it was discovered this morning.
Commissioner Julie Wiedower asked if it was automatically deferred to the next meeting. Ms.
Weldon stated that the motion would need to have a date specific noted in the motion. Mr.
Minyard read form the ordinance concerning notices including legal ads and mailing and
explained the timeline needed to have a meeting at an earlier date. He continued that they
could have a meeting on July 2, but could not guarantee that this room would be available or
that all commissioners could be present.
Mr. Wilson stated that the thought the commission could change the requirement for notices
over the text of the ordinance. Ms. Weldon stated that the commission could not override the
ordinance and that the Staff or the commission could not be document that the notices were
sent.
Commissioner Toni Johnson made a motion to defer the item till the July meeting for notification
issues. Commissioner BJ Bowen seconded and the motion passed with a vote of 6 ayes and 1
absent via roll call vote (Ripley absent).
7 of 10
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. Two.
DATE: June 11, 2012
APPLICANT: John Sullivan, Wish List Home Services
ADDRESS: 424 E 6th Street
COA REQUEST: Porch Roof replacement
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 424 E 6th Street. The
property’s legal description is “Part of the Trapnall Block
in Stevenson’s Addition to the City of Little Rock...,
Pulaski County, Arkansas."
This building was built around 1890. The 2006 survey
form states: “A stone Queen Anne style house with
typical turreted cornet single lite double hung windows
with dentil work at dormer and porch.” It is considered a
"Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic
District.
This application is for a Porch Roof replacement.
Originally, the porch roof was metal, and this application
is to convert it to be covered with asphalt shingles.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On September 2009, a COC was issued to Leslie Borgognoni for roof repair.
On September 8, 2008, a COC was issued to Bob Wood for porch repair.
On September 9, 2004, a COA was approved and issued to Bob Wood for renovations to the
front porch including changing of columns and adding fence and gate.
PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT
AND GUIDELINES: The guidelines state on page 58:
Roofs should be preserved in their original size, shape, and pitch, with original
features (cresting, chimneys, finials, cupolas, etc.) and, if possible, with original
roofing material (slate, tile, metal.) Composition shingles may be used if the
original material is not economically feasible. Dark colors are best for historic
buildings.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
Location of Project
8 of 10
The original roofing material on the porch was metal roofing known as Follansbee roofing. It is
metal plates, roughly 12 x 18 inch that interlock to cover the roof. While this type of roof has a
very long life span, it is quite costly to install. The proposal is to install a rubber EPDM
underlayment, and then install the same roofing as on the rest of the structure. The current
shingles are Landmark roofing by CertainTeed. Other houses in the district have a more
shallow pitch roof over the first floor and are covered in the same shingles as the rest of the
structure.
While switching materials (from metal to asphalt shingles) is not the ultimate, the preservation of
the porch with its original pitch and size, outweighs the change in materials.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no
comments regarding this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
3. Obtaining a building permit.
COMMISSION ACTION: June 11, 2012
Brian Minyard, Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. Notices were met for this
item to be heard. There were no comments or questions from citizens.
View of roof second floor taken March 2011 Existing south elevation
Desired shingles Close-up of roof.
9 of 10
Commissioner Mark Brown stated the he owned property within 150 feet of the application and
is recusing form this item. He left the meeting at this time.
Chairman Chris Vanlandingham stated that at this time there are five members of the
commission present. The applicant must receive at least four positive votes for the motion to
pass. The applicant stated the he wanted to be heard tonight.
John Sullivan, representing the applicant, stated that they had explored the Follansbee metal
roofing, but found it to be cost prohibitive and only one local source for the materials and
installation. He stated that it was a 10x25 porch and that they were trying to finish the project.
Commissioner Julie Wiedower stated that it was a great house. She asked if the guarantee
would be honored if the membrane were installed underneath the shingles. He stated that the
roofer has stated that it should have a long life span with that installation. He continued that the
flashing would be the same for both styles of roofs. The flashing would be painted to color
match the granite. The shingles would be the same brand and style as the body of the house.
He stated that the rest of the roof was reroofed about 18 months ago.
There were no citizens to speak for or against the application.
Commissioner Wiedower made a motion to approve the application as requested with Staff
recommendations. Commissioner Toni Johnson seconded and the motion passed with five
ayes, 1 recusal (Brown) and 1 absent (Ripley).
V. Other Matters
The spreadsheet was handed out in the agenda meeting for Certificates of compliance to get
the commissioners up to date.
There are no new enforcement issues to report to the commission.
Chairman Vanlandingham asked Staff to ask other districts how long items can be on the books
before they build for both COA and COC. He stated that he was under the impression that the
HDC did not have a time limit on those. Mr. Minyard stated that he would ask Patricia Blick,
CLG coordinator, to do a statewide poll. He anticipates that Staff will be able to report back in
July. It will be reported under the Other Matters.
Citizen Communication
Page Wilson addressed the commission about having a meeting before the next scheduled
monthly meeting. He stated that he knew Commissioner Mark Brown would be absent in July
and that Commissioner Randy Ripley would still have to recuse. He asked the commission to
reconsider to have a meeting in three weeks. Of the commissioners present today, not all
would be able to attend a meeting on July 2nd, therefore he would have the same number of
commissioners voting.
Debra Weldon stressed that the due process requirement had to be met for a public hearing to
be held and that it was not just a technicality.
Chairman Vanlandingham said that he was pleased with development in that area, that it was
new to the Commission today, and that they were bound to follow the law.
It was concluded that the meeting would be on July 9, 2012.
There were no other citizens present to speak.
VI. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 5:32 p.m.
Attest:
it
&k' ) � "i
Secretary /Staff
Date
Date
10 of 10
I -,I - I Z-�-