HDC_07 14 20081
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, July 14, 2008, 5:00 p.m.
Sister Cities’ Conference Room, City Hall
I. Roll Call
Quorum was present being three (3) in number.
Members Present: Marshall Peters
Julie Wiedower
Susan Bell
Members Absent: Wesley Walls
Bob Wood
City Attorney: Debra Weldon
Staff Present: Eve Gieringer
Brian Minyard
Citizens Present: John Pagan
II. Approval of Minutes
a June 9, 2008
Commissioner Julie Wiedower made a motion to approve the minutes of June 9, 2008
as submitted, Commissioner Susan Bell seconded, and the motion was passed with a
vote of 3 ayes and 2 absent.
2
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. A.
DATE: June 9, 2008
APPLICANT: Tonya Robinson-Fisher
ADDRESS: 501 E 7th Street
COA
REQUEST: Replace all Windows and Replace wire fence along street
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 501 E 7th Street.
The property’s legal description is the “North 100
feet of lot 1 block 4 Johnson’s addition to the City of
Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas."
The house at 501 East 7th Street was built in the
1960s and it is a non-contributing structure,
according to the 1988 survey. The 1978 survey lists
it as a vernacular cottage.
This application is to replace all windows and
replace wire fence along street. The bent wire fence
along 7th Street would be removed and replaced
with an ornamental iron fence with walk gate and
drive gate. The drive gate would be operated with
an automatic opener/closer. The replacement windows would be an all vinyl window
with six over six panes with fiberglass half screens.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On April 7, 2005, a letter was sent to the applicant concerning a new gate on the
property. A COA was needed, but it was never filed.
On July 9, 2007, a COA was issued for the replacement of columns on the front porch,
installing a privacy fence in the rear yard and painting the brick structure. The painting
of the brick structure and the front porch column portion of the application were due to
an enforcement issue.
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
WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND
GUIDELINES:
The replacement widows are to be a “solid vinyl construction” with “Fusion welded
frame and sashes.” They are white in color with a fiberglass half screen on the lower
sash. They are tilt in windows for easier cleaning.
The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation states:
2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved.
The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces
that characterize a property shall be avoided.
3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time,
place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical
development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural
elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.
6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced.
Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a
distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color,
texture and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials.
Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by
documentary, physical or pictorial evidence.
The house, which is not listed as contributing as of the 1988 survey, is still is recognized
as a record of its time. The house was built in the late 1950’s to early 1960’s. Although
the bulk of the historic homes in the district are not of this period, there are two ranch
style houses in the district. The wire fence along 7th Street probably predates the
house. The Guidelines state on page 66:
Fencing material should be appropriate to the style and period of the
house. Cast iron fences were common through the Victorian period and
should be retained and maintained. Wrought iron and bent wire fences
are also historic.
Fence: The majority of the front fence is the bent wire fence. The walk gate and the
fence sections remains as so, but the drive gate was replaced in 2005 with a chain link
gate. Later, at Staff’s request, the drive gate was painted black to match the historic
gate and fence. The existing fence is bowed in places, but is still structurally sound.
4
The fence could be cleaned of its’ rust
and repainted in a black paint for metal
applications as the Secretary of Interior
Stands state in section 2 and 6 as
quoted above. Portions of the east
fence was bent wire fence but was
replaced with a wood privacy fence in
the 2007 COA.
The proposal is to replace the fence with
an ornamental iron fence as shown
below.
Gate and Fence Detail
Existing front gate Existing fence and fence to east
Existing drive gate and fence to west
5
The fence features square posts with ball finials. The fence has three rails with two
near the top. The pickets do not have finials, but ground points. The walk gate will
feature an arched top with a cross bar pattern in the center of the gate. The driveway
gate will be flat across the top with a cross bar pattern on it. The driveway gate will be
motorized to swing into the property.
The bent wire is historic to the district, although not of the same period as the house. It
does need to be maintained in a better fashion, as it needs sanded, primed, and
painted. The proposed fence is simple enough in design to be compatible with the
district. If constructed to a similar height as the other adjacent fences, it could “fit in”
with the neighborhood.
Windows: The windows are double hung wood windows with weights and pulleys. The
windows are in need of repair as some of the cords may have been broken/removed
and some of the windows do not close properly. The existing windows as shown on the
left above are 8 over 8 windows. (The window pictured on the left is open.) The
security bars have been on the house since at least 1978. The proposed windows are
shown to be a six over six window of all vinyl construction with a fiberglass half screen
as shown below left.
Existing window
Proposed Window
The Secretary of Interior Standards states that repairing is preferable to replacement. If
something is replaced, it should be replaced with similar materials. See page two of this
report for the actual quote. The wood double hung windows should be examined by a
contractor skilled in historic preservation techniques to show that the windows are
deteriorated beyond repair. If a sash has rotten wood on it, a wood sash can be custom
made for the window. Cords to operate the windows can be replaced and make the
windows operable. The applicant has not provided proof that the windows are beyond
repair.
6
The applicant has proposed an all vinyl window as replacement windows. The
secretary of the Interiors standards state in number 6 as quoted on page 2 of this report
that if replaced, it “shall match the old in design, color, texture and other visual qualities
and, where possible, materials.” Vinyl windows with a simulated 6 over 6 do not match
the old windows in design, visual thickness of jambs and muntins/mullions, and most
importantly materials. Plastic vinyl windows were not available when the house was
constructed.
If the windows were proven repairable, Staff would suggest the repair of the windows
according to restoration standards and the installation of storm windows with full
screens that would preserve the original windows while improving energy efficiency of
the home. Storm windows with operable lower sashes would maintain the functionality
of the windows.
If the windows do prove to be beyond repair, Staff believes the alternatives to be (listed
in priority from highest to lowest): 1) replacement all wood sashes with higher efficiency
glass utilizing the existing pulleys and weights, 2) replacement of the sashes with a
wood sash clad in metal or vinyl utilizing different movement and locking mechanisms,
or 3) replacement of the entire window unit with a wood window clad in metal or vinyl.
All of these options should maintain the 8 over 8 pane arrangement.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there
were no comments regarding this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
1) Fence Replacement: Approval with the following conditions:
a) Obtaining a building permit within 90 days of obtaining approval.
b) Project to be completed within 180 days of obtaining permit.
c) Fence, openers, and all hardware to be painted black.
d) No portion of fence structure shall be located in the right of way, nor swing
into the right of way.
e) Operation of gate shall be remotely operated, without the control box, control
panel, etc being placed on a pole in the right of way or on the property.
2) Window Replacement: Denial
COMMISSION ACTION: June 9, 2008
The commission was informed that the applicant had not completed the notice of
adjoining property owners as required. The applicant had been informed by Staff that
she had not met her deadline for notification. Staff requested a deferral until the July
2008 hearing. Commissioner Wesley Walls made a motion to defer and Commissioner
Kay Tatum seconded. The motion to defer was passed with a vote or 4 ayes and 1
absent.
7
STAFF UPDATE: July 14, 2008
The applicant has requested that her item be deferred to the August 2008 agenda.
Staff supports the request for deferral. Staff will provide an updated Staff report at that
time to include all enforcement items that have been included in this item.
COMMISSION ACTION: July 14, 2008
There was a discussion of the bylaws concerning the number of deferrals that an
applicant can request and the 12-month prohibition of not resubmitting the same
application. Commissioner Julie Wiedower made a motion to defer and Commissioner
Susan Bell seconded. The motion to defer was passed with a vote or 3 ayes and 2
absent.
8
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. One.
DATE: July 14, 2008
APPLICANT: Rosalind “Michelle” Welch, 1004 Commerce Street
ADDRESS: 1004 Commerce Street
COA
REQUEST:
Addition to rear of house, roof replacement, siding replacement,
picket fence in front with arbor and exterior lighting.
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 1004 Commerce
Street. The property’s legal description is “ the
south 47.5 feet of the east 89.0 feet of Lot 10 and
the N 1/2 of Lot 9, Block 58, Original City of Little
Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas."
The architectural significance in the 1978 survey is
of a Priority II (I being the highest and III being the
lowest) and Historical Significance of Local
significance. The 1988 survey lists the property as
a ca. 1910 Colonial Revival house and a
contributing structure.
The application is for an 1) addition to rear of house,
2) roof replacement, 3) siding replacement, 4) picket
fence in front with arbor and 5) exterior lighting.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On November 1, 2000, an administrative approval to replace a cedar shingle roof with a
roof of same material with no changes to roof slope and no introduction of new
architectural detailing or materials was granted.
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
9
Existing front east elevation 1978 photo
Existing north elevation Existing south elevation
PROPOSAL: 1) addition to rear of house, 2) roof replacement, 3) siding replacement, 4)
picket fence in front with arbor and 5) exterior lighting.
1) Addition to the rear of the house
The proposed addition is a 16’ by 30’
addition across the entirety of the back of
the house for a sunroom, mud room and
expanded bathroom. The darkish “L”
shaped feature is a stairway to the attic for
storage access.
Windows:
There will be no new windows on the south
side of the addition. There will be three
3’x6’ windows on the north side of the
addition, there will be one 2’x6’ window on
either side of the French door on the west
side of the addition. There will also be an
Proposed plan of addition
10
oval window above the French door. In addition, on the west façade, there will be a
4’x4’ window. The windows will be single hung Alenco windows, white in color.
Doors:
There will be a exterior door on the south side of the addition located in the mud room
with no widows in the door. There is a proposed French door facing west located in the
sunroom.
The photo provided in the packet “Capture the
Outdoors” is similar to the improvements
described by the applicant. There will be an
oval window above the door instead of the
modified Palladian window.
Roofing on the new addition: The sunroom
portion of the addition will have a gable end
roof as shown in the “Capture” photo. The
mudroom area will have a shed roof slanting to
the west that will tie into the existing and
proposed roofs. The shingles will be Tamco
Architectural shingles, weatherwood in color.
The proposal is to re-roof the entire house.
The siding on the addition would be Hardiplank
8” smooth lap siding. The color would be pale
yellow with light colored trim.
2) Roof Replacement
The roof replacement will replace the cedar shake roof with architectural shingles. The
shingles will be Tamco Architectural shingles, weatherwood in color. The proposal is to
reroof the entire house.
Proposed North Elevation with addition Proposed South Elevation with addition
Capture the Outdoors photo
11
3) Siding Replacement
The proposal is to replace the wood siding on the original house with Hardiplank 8”
smooth lap siding. The trim pieces would remain from the original house if in good
order. If replaced, they would be replaces with the same size lumber.
4) Picket Fence in Front with Arbor
The picket fence would be across the entirety of the front of the property along
Commerce Street and return tot the existing fences on the north and south sides of the
house. The applicant states the fence will be” no taller than 36” tall, pickets no wider
that 4 inches wide and nor further than three inches apart. The design will be
compatible and proportionate to the house. It will be made of wood and painted white
or cream dependant on the trim color I use for the house.” The arbor will me made to
duplicate the one shown below.
5) Exterior Lighting
The details of the lamppost and lighting to be added to the front yard were not provided
to the Staff for review.
WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND
GUIDELINES:
1) Addition to the rear of the house
The zoning of the site is R-4A that has a 25’ setback for the rear yard. This addition will
abut or go over the setback, which would require a Board of Adjustment Variance. The
addition is difficult to see from the street, so it is questionable fi the commission should
hear the case. However, the addition of the fence, the replacement of the siding, and
the reroofing dictates that a public hearing is held.
It appears that the new window on the south side of the structure is in the original block
of the house. This would involve removing, replacing, or adding a window to the original
structure. In the photo above, labeled “Existing South Elevation” the photo shows two
vertical windows (one over one). Staff is not supportive of removing two original
Location of fence in front yard Proposed Arbor on Commerce Street
12
windows and adding this new window, especially a square windows that does reflect the
original verticalness of all the existing windows on the original block of the house.
Modifying a size of an existing window or adding a new window is not recommended in
the guidelines as stated on page 52 as quoted below:
Windows should be preserved in their original location, size, and design
with their original materials and number of panes. Stained, leaded,
beveled, or patterned glass, which is a character-defining feature of a
building, should not be removed. Windows should not be added to the
primary façade or to a secondary façade if easily visible. Windows should
be repaired rather than replaced. However, if replacement is necessary
due to severe deterioration, the replacement should match, as closely as
possible, the original in materials and design. Replacement windows
should not have snap-on or flush muntins. Unless they originally existed,
jalousie, awning, and picture windows and glass brick are inappropriate on
an historic building.
According to the website, the proposed windows are all vinyl. The applicant will need to
verify that in the public hearing. Having vinyl windows on an addition that is clearly
designed and readable as such, is not the same as replacement vinyl windows in the
original structure. The vinyl windows actually make the addition read more clearly that it
is a addition. Staff is supportive of the window choice in the addition only, not for the 4’
x 4’ window replacement. Staff does recognize that the 4x4 window is located in he
bathroom. However, drapes, blinds, or window film can be used to block the view from
outside.
The guidelines state on page 62 under additions (new Rooms) that:
Additions should be of a compatible design, in keeping with the original
structure’s character, roof shape, materials, and the alignment of window,
door, and cornice height. Additions include porches and bay windows, as
well as entire wings or rooms. They should be located on the rear façade
and be subordinate to the original structure.
The original building and the addition should be differentiated in a manner so that the
addition looks new and does not duplicate the original structure. The siding and roofing
may be different from the original block of the house. Those changes, along with
decreasing the size of the addition 12-18” on the north and south facades will create a
break form the original block of the house. This would result in an addition 27’ to 28’
wide instead of 30’ wide. The roofing (architectural shingles) and siding (Hardiplank
smooth lap siding) could be different with a logical break in this scenario.
The elevations provide show that the cornice height of the addition will be the same as
the original. This will aid to tie the addition to the original house while maintaining
separation of the addition. The roof over the sunroom is a gable. There are two other
gables on the main block, on facing east and one facing north as shown in the 1978
photo earlier in the report. The rest of the addition will be a shed roof. These roof types
13
proposed are either already on the house or are a common means of covering additions
to the rear of a house of this era.
2) Roof Replacement
The applicant has stated the there has
been issues with squirrels living in her
attic and has provided a photo of the
damage where they enter her roof. 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.
If the overall roof is still watertight, this is only a maintenance issue to repair the squirrel
damage. The applicant has not noted that the roof is leaking, only that there is squirrel
damage. Staff recommends that the applicant repair the roof, not replace it.
3) Siding Replacement
On page 50 of the guidelines, it states:
Historic siding materials, such as weatherboard, wood shingles, and
stucco, should be preserved. If original siding materials must be replaced,
the new siding should match the original as closely as possible, especially
with respect to board size. Original corner boards should be duplicated in
their full original dimensions.
The applicant has provided photos of squirrel damage to the exterior of her home. The
applicant has not provided proof that the siding is uniformly rotted or non-water tight
overall. Again, Staff feels that this is a maintenance issue and that individual board
should be replaced to remove the threat of squirrels living in the attic. Siding can be
obtained locally for the repair work. Staff is not supportive of the removal of the original
siding.
4) Picket Fence in Front with Arbor
The applicant has proposed a front picket fence using the language for picket fences
found on page 66. She has also proposed an arbor with gate as shown earlier in this
report. The materials used and the technique used should distinguish this as a modern
element. Staff is supportive of the fence as described by the applicant and a duplication
of the arbor as shown in the photo.
Roof damage attributed to squirrels
14
5) Exterior Lighting
Staff recommendation forthcoming on the exterior lighting based on the submittal of the
actual materials.
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 within 90 days of hearing.
2. Project to be completed within 180 days of obtaining permit.
3. Addition to rear of home: Staff is supportive of the addition if it does not
encroach into the 25’ rear yard setback and is a width of 27’ – 28’ wide. Staff is
not supportive of the 4’x4’ window on the south side.
4. Roof replacement: Staff is not supportive of replacing the cedar shake roof with
architectural shingles.
5. Siding replacement: Staff is not supportive of the siding replacement.
6. Fence and Arbor; Staff is supportive of the fence and arbor.
7. Exterior Lighting: Staff recommendation forthcoming.
COMMISSION ACTION: July 14, 2008
Staff informed the Commission that the legal notices had not been completed in a timely
fashion. Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the August 2008 meeting.
Commissioner Susan Bell made a motion to defer to the August 2008 meeting and it
was seconded by Commissioner Julie Wiedower. The motion passed with 3 ayes and 2
absent.
15
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. Two.
DATE: July 14, 2008
APPLICANT: John Pagan, Arkansas Arts Center
ADDRESS: 501 East 9th Street
COA
REQUEST:
Brick screening wall around new air conditioning unit and sign at 9th
and Commerce.
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 501 East 9th
Street. The property’s legal description is “Part of
Section 2, T1N, R12W, more particularly described
as that part of the SW lying east of Quapaw Line,
West of McAlmont Street and South of East 9th
Street, Pulaski County, Arkansas."
The 1988 survey lists the structure as a 1960’s
museum building of a non-contributing status. The
original building was a WPA Moderne building built
ca 1937 as shown on page 43 of the Guidelines.
The front façade can be seen in one of the galleries.
The building has been added onto in several stages
over the years.
This application is for two items. The first part is a brick screening wall around a new air
conditioning unit and the second part is a sign at 9th and Commerce.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On March 17, 1989, approval for additions and modifications to the building.
On May 7, 1998, approval with conditions for a 31,500 sf addition to the building
complex.
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
16
PROPOSAL:
Brick Screening Wall:
The brick screening wall will be on the northwesterly corner of the Arts Center building,
visible from the Ninth and Commerce Street intersection. It will be west and adjoining
the driveway/loading dock. The brick screening wall is necessary to screen a new air
conditioning unit that will need to be placed in that location for the Wolfe/Rockefeller
Gallery. The Arts Center is working to match the brick of the adjoining building as
closely as possible. The wall height is variable with a maximum of 7’-8” feet tall. The
height of the a/c unit is 4’-4” inches tall and sits on a pad 18” above grade for a total
height of 5’10” tall. The wall will be approximately 24” taller than the unit. The wall will
project a total of 16’-10” from the north wall and be 17’-2” wide east to west. There will
be an iron gate on the east side of the wall for access made of galvanized metal painted
brown to match the railing to the east. The north, west and east sides will be brick.
There will also be an additional bollard added to match the existing to the east.
The southwest corner of the wall will have a planter built that is 45 inches tall. It will
also be of brick with landscaping in the planter. The planter will help to soften the height
of the screening wall.
Proposed north elevation
17
Included in the application package are specifications for the a/c unit that state that it is
a quiet unit that produces little noise and vibrations compared to competitive units on
the market.
Signage:
The sign will be placed at the corner of Commerce and Ninth Streets. The text will be
“Arkansas Arts Center” with an arrow that will direct traffic down Commerce Street. The
sign will be two sided. The dimensions will be 8’-0” wide and 18” tall for a total of 12
square feet. It will be supported on short posts that will allow the sign to float above the
ground approximately six inches. The sign will be made of fabricated aluminum with cut
aluminum plate lettering. The background will be a custom finish of burnished
aluminum to make it a matte non-shiny finish. It will have black text and arrow. The
posts will be set in concrete footings. The text will be the Swiss Extended Font as
shown second from the bottom on the graphic.
Proposed view from northwest
18
WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND
GUIDELINES:
Brick Screening Wall:
On page 78 of the Guidelines, it states under number 7. Mechanical systems for
Commercial Structures:
Mechanical systems, such as heating and air conditioning units, electrical
connections, exterior stairs and elevators, should be located so that street
visibility is minimal.
By screening the unit with a brick wall that repeats other screening walls on the building
and by adding a planter on the west side, they have attempted to minimize the unit and
its screen wall.
Signage:
Proposed signage
19
The Guidelines state under E: Signs on page 71:
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.
2. Free-Standing:
Free-standing signs should be low, small, and constructed of wood or a
non-shiny finish. The recommended size should not exceed six square
feet in area. These signs should be located in landscaped areas…
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 for the ground
aimed directly at the sign and shielded from street view. Lighting should
not use visible bulbs, internal sources or luminous paint.
The design of the sign is modern and will not be confused with a historic sign. The sign
will not be lighted by fixtures dedicated for this purpose; the only lighting will be ambient
light from the streetlights.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: The Parks and Recreation
department has responded to Staff and they are okay with the installation of the sign
and the screening wall.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a building permit.
2. Project to be completed within 180 days of obtaining permit.
COMMISSION ACTION: July 14, 2008
Brian Minyard, Staff, made a presentation on the air conditioner unit screen including
planter beds and the proposed signage. There were no questions of staff by the
commissioners.
20
John Pagan, Facilities Manager Arkansas Arts Center, was present to present the
application. He stated that the reason for the new screen was to enhance the air
conditioning system. The existing unit is very inefficient. The new unit is an aqua
cooled unit and is quieter than most units of its size. It should be less noisy than the
freeway noise.
He discussed the sign next. The sign was donated to the Arts Center. They are aware
of the Conway Schulte plan and will take sign down if it does not fit in with the new
master plan.
Commissioner Julie Wiedower asked about the screen detail. Mr. Pagan replied that it
was a solid brick wall that will look identical to the west wall of the building. He
continued to discuss the double metal gate on the east side. Mr. Minyard added that in
the staff report, the wall height varies form 7’-8" at the driveway to about one half that
height at the western elevation. Mr. Pagan stated the planter was added to visually
reduce the wall height.
Commissioner Wiedower continued and asked about the floor in the area. Mr. Pagan
responded that it was concrete everywhere within the enclosure. He also stated that
there was brick on top of the slab and mentioned the grass that is on the drive area.
The drainage will go into existing drainage and both sides of the wall will be brick.
Commissioner Wiedower stated that when she was on the commission before, the
commission approved the addition to the Arts Center. At that time, they were
concerned about the trees and some were lost. She asked what would be done to save
the closest tree to the new AC unit. Mr. Pagan stated that the footing would be hand
dug. He stated that they would do so to protect the tree.
Commissioner Susan Bell asked about the unit. Mr. Pagan responded that it was a
water-cooled air conditioner to meet requirements for a new exhibit "Pharaohs" from the
Boston Museum.
Chairman Marshall Peters asked a question on the proposed sign. He stated that the
placement of the sign at the corner could detract from the Quapaw Quarter Line
monument. Mr. Pagan stated that it is to be set back towards the maple tree, not right
on the corner, more to the east. The City of Little Rock will be asked to take the sign
down that is located to the west on 9th Street.
Mr. Minyard asked three questions. The first was which sign was to be taken down. A
discussion on tree protection was held. Mr. Pagan stated that the plan was to have all
vehicles to drive on the driveway only. At the end of the discussion, it was decided that
the Arts Center was a responsible neighbor and that it would do all possible to save the
tree. No amendment to the application or recommendation was made. The location of
the sign was discussed next. Does the commission request that the Staff go out to the
site to approve the location. Commissioner Wiedower stated that she did not have a
21
question on the size and shape. She did ask if they had considered sight lines at Ninth
and Commerce. Staff is to check progress.
Staff stated that the Staff recommendation stands as is with no changes. A motion was
made by Commission Wiedower to approve with Staff recommendations.
Commissioner Bell seconded and the motion passed with a vote of 3 ayes and 2
absent.
Commissioner Wiedower asked and Mr. Pagan stated that the timeline was to start
immediately. He is trying to meet the deadline for the Andy Warhol exhibit.
22
III. Other Matters
a Mr. Minyard stated that the enforcement issues are as they stood last month.
Item #12, Mr. Minyard will get with Bob Wood on the scaffolding. Chairman
Peters added 1301 Cumberland Street for a screen in the backyard that is
visible from the street. Bars have been put back up on the Cook Rein House
at 6th and Sherman Street. Mr. Minyard stated that an interpretation needed
to be requested for maintenance about bars. May you take them down to
paint or do you have to paint them in place? The window air conditioners
were discussed. Debra Weldon commented about if the state statue said
anything about maintenance.
Eve Gieringer mentioned the windows on 308 Daisy Bates. The enforcement
issue of blatantly ignoring a COA was discussed. Mr. Minyard stated that the
commission and staff need to be very clear on what items are approved.
Commissioner Wiedower is concerned about the east side windows being
vinyl and the visibility of those windows. It was stressed that the applicant
must ask for one item, not options of multiple choices on windows, bricks, etc.
Commissioner Wiedower is concerned about the commission saying that the
applicant must restore their windows while not having qualified restoration
specialists in place in the community. The commission should be
sympathetic on the replacement issue. Mr. Minyard brought up the option of
adding storm windows that do protect he historic material and provide a level
of security. Commissioner Bell stated that there were crafts people to restore
windows. QQA could maybe develop a list of craftsmen.
Ms. Gieringer asked how long an enforcement item has before zoning
enforcement serves them a notice. She was concerned that the items have
been out of compliance for months and with the deferral of the items, the
clock still runs. Chairman Peters stated that there probably should not be a
set time for all cases, but in this case, he would rather have the enforcement
items be taken out of the COA. Commissioner Wiedower liked the idea of
making a set of guidelines to protect the commission so that the commission
would not appear to be applying them inequitably.
Commissioner Peters would rather enforce issues by having an enforcement
officer issue a courtesy notice. A discussion continued about the
environmental court/circuit court.
Mr. Minyard is to send a letter to 501 E 7th to stress that she must attend the
August meeting. If she does not attend the August hearing, a courtesy notice
will be sent to her immediately thereafter. If a building permit has been
pulled, a certificate of occupancy can be denied. A stop work order can also
be issued.
Commissioner Wiedower asked that Staff be more forceful on taking stuff
down instead of suggesting a public hearing on the items. A discussion
23
continued about what the violation was, putting the items up or not getting a
COA for the items. Ms. Weldon stated in municipal court, the violation is the
failure to obtain a COA. The fine is as stated in Chapter 1-9. The fine can be
up to $500.00 per day. If the commission denies the COA, it becomes a
matter of specific performance. Circuit court can provide equity by causing
her to take them down. The City Attorneys office will provide legal counsel for
it.
It was asked of Staff to separate enforcement issues from the original
application items. Mr. Minyard asked if the commission would set a time for
removal of items from the house if the enforcement items were denied. Ms.
Weldon said that if the next step was going to court, the commission needs to
deny the application and state a time limit to take the items down.
Commissioner Wiedower added that the bylaws need to be amended so that
there is a fair and equal treatment of items and a case-by-case basis can
leave the commission open for lawsuits.
Jay Core was discussed and his enforcement item. It was decided that if it
was known when he was in town, he could be served.
Arc Arkansas has made progress on the landscaping and site work.
b Mr. Minyard was asked to ask the HDC about charging a fee for a COA
application. Commissioner Wiedower asked about charging an application
fee. Ms. Gieringer stated that Staff could find the property owners for the
applicants. A fee could be charged. Commissioner Wiedower asked Staff to
do some research on this item. Staff is to check with NAPC on application
fees in the country. Mr. Minyard stated that if city employees did the
research, the state statues still must be followed.
c The list of items for the workshop was mentioned and it was discussed about
waiting for the new commissioner to start.
d The commission asked if Staff could start calling members before the meeting
as a reminder. Staff stated that this could be done.
e Preservation Plan Update: Mr. Minyard met the consultant at the conference
last week. The contract has been signed and a "Notice to Proceed" will be
sent soon. Commissioner Wiedower wants to know where the Dunbar survey
is. She added that in the future the funding source needs to be analyzed in
reference to the Dunbar Survey. Mr. Minyard stated that Central High and
MacArthur Park are still in the hands of the AHPP office.
f There was a discussion that Debra Weldon, of the City Attorney’s office,
would be out of the country on August 11, 2008. A motion was made to move
the August meeting from August 11, 2008 to August 18, 2008 by