HDC_07 07 1981MINUTES
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
JULY 7, 1981
4:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: MR. JOHN JARRARD, CHAIRMAN
MS. BETH FOTI
MR. LONNIE POWERS
MR. SAM STRAUSS, JR.
MR. GEORGE WORTHEN
MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE
STAFF PRESENT: MIKE DOOLEY
CITY ATTORNEY: LESTER McKINLEY
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 4:00 p.m. and finding a
quorum, the Commission moved to accept the Minutes of the previous meeting
as recorded.
The only item on the Agenda was announced as:
The Owner: First Lutheran Church of Little Rock
The Applicant: Mr. Del Schmand
The Location: 716 Rock Street
Mr. Schmand trustee for the church, presented the application explaining
the history of the 80 year old Education Building and the proposed altera-
tions which included:
Outline materials and methods specifications for the exterior
renovation.
A. DEMOLITION
1. Complete removal of the existing exterior, deteriorated,
sand pressed brick masonry to the foundation line.
2. Remove the existing deteriorated and out-sized wood
windows, doors, and supporting framing.
3. Remove the existing concrete front entry steps both
to the main level and those going to the basement.
4. Remove the existing flag pole and steel fire escape
steps on the front and rear elevations of the building
that were installed during the period that the build-
ing was used as an elementary school educational
facility.
B. RE- CONSTRUCTION
1. Install a cast stone base wainscote matching, approxi-
mately, in elevation the cast stone base wainscote on
the neighboring church structure.
2. Re-bricking from the wainscote base to the cornice
line with brick that matches the brick on the neigh-
boring church and parsonage building.
3. Installing cast stone window and door trim with cast
stone spandrel panels at the floor locations.
4. Replace and reduce the existing glass area with
aluminum anodized awning windows with insulating glass,
color bronze.
.4s. 5. Relocate and install aluminum anodized doors at ground
level to facilitate access to the building from the
church to the south of the educational building and the
drive to the north of the building. This access arrange-
ment eliminates dangerous exterior steps.
6. Construction of an entry court to be partially paved,
leaving planting areas. This area is to be delineated
from public areas by means of low matching brick wall
with openings as required by circulation.
7. The roof has been replaced and will not require additional
work except for new plumbing vents as may be required by
interior toilet area revisions, etc.
8. Because of deterioration, beginning to become serious,
in many of the exposed rafter tails, we have elected to
box in the roof cornice to match the neighboring church
and parsonage.
He stated that the First Lutheran Church had complied with all of the appli-
cation procedures, notifications, and submission requirements for this report.
Mr. Tom Calder, President of the Church, explained how the space in the
building would be utilized to suit the needs of the church. He believed that
this was the optimal arrangement for thier long range needs. He discussed
the handicapped entrance in the back of the structure and assured the Com-
mission it would not be visible from the street. He reported that the wain -
scote base and the new brick would match, as close as possible, those elements
on the adjacent sanctuary. He said the plaza area and entrances were situated
to create a functional relationship to the adjacent structure. The arrange-
ment of windows and doors, he explained, was to conserve energy.
Mr. Lee Gordon of the Rockefeller Foundation stated he had no objection to
the remodeling of the structure although he would like to see the original
brick saved if possible, and he thought the proposed window and door openings
were not appropriate for that building.
Mr. Ralph Megna, Executive Director of the Quapaw Quarter Association, pre-
sented an eight (8) page report from his Preservation Services Program which
summarized their research on the structure as follows:
The First Lutheran Church's Christian Education Building exterior masonry
veneer is in deteriorated, but repairable, condition. Its principal problems
are the result of water damage caused by inadequate control of rainwater
drainage. Direct roof run-off, indirect splash-back from building elements
and ground surfaces, and site flooding have all contributed to the present
problems. A well executed rehabilitation of the structure should attack
these causes, rather than focus on the symptoms. The repair of the existing
masonry would save the church the cost of replacing the entire exterior and
provide a highly functional and handsome building to house the various
activities of the congregation.
In addition to discussing the condition of the materials, problems and possi-
ble solutions, Mr. Megna gave a film presentation which included successful
adaptive use projects across the country and within the State. As well as
projects and potentials for the City of Little Rock.
i Mr. John Mathews, representing a client in the 500 block of Rock Street,
stated that the proposed changes would have a negative effect on property
values, and that the unique character of the building should be maintained
to keep the areas distinctive structures from looking like other recently
developed areas of the City.
Mr. Carl Brunck, a member of the Church Building Committee, spoke in favor
of the application, citing the unsafe physical condition of the brick and
noted that the mortar was a lime /sand composition which was extremely
susceptable to erosion. He described the problems relative to cracks in
the mortar and explained how the metal fasteners had pulled away from the
brick and mortar, thus creating a hazard which may result in materials
falling off the structure.
Mr. Joe Craft, a retired masonry contractor and supervisor for Pikens and
Bond Construction Company, was introduced and stated that the present con-
ditions were unsafe and that the mortar would have to be replaced in order
to use the existing brick. He felt that it would be extremely difficult
to find replacement brick to match the color and texture of the existing
surface.
Mr. William Shute, an insurance agent which carries the church policy, indi-
cated that if the renovation request required the church to use the same
brick it may result in what he called a liability and the remodeling may
not receive a favorable recommendation for coverage.
Mr. Del Schmand concluded the applicants presentation by stating that the
church believed it was in compliance with certain specifics in the Historic
District Guidelines, and pointed out that the church had started its plans
to remodel prior to the creation of the Historic District in May of this
year, and that he felt this might constitute a condition of hardship for
approving the Certificate of Appropriateness.
Mr. Megna provided the Commission with a landscape plan which he felt would
benefit the church by improving the drainage of the property as well as
maintain the existing window and entrance areas. He stated that the Quapaw
Quarter Association had solicited comments from persons with professional
expertise in renovation activities (such as Mr. Wilson Stiles who is the
Arkansas Historic Preservation Officer) and it had been determined that the
existing brick could be maintained. He summized that the mortar found at
the base of the interior of the walls could be the result of the original
construction rather than deterioration over time. He felt that any changes
to the structure should be compatible with the neighborhood and questioned
whether saving the existing brick would be more costly than a new brick
facade.
Mr. Carl Brunck noted that the Quapaw Quarter's Preservation Services Report
did not mention the safety factor involved with maintaining and keeping the
existing brick and he presented a letter from Mr. Victor Lienheart of
Lienheart Construction Company who repaired the roof. In this letter, he
stated that he was unable to find any brick that would match the existing
spaces on the parapet over the front steps and warned that if something is
not done the whole parapet is subject to fall on the sidewalk and street.
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ACTION
Mr. Lonnie Powers made a motion to deny the application which was seconded
by Ms. Beth Foti. Mr. George Worthen then moved to amend that motion to
allow a one (1) month deferral in order to allow the church to review the
submissions by the Quapaw Quarter Association, to talk to congregation and
Building Committee members about the suggestions and to provide actual cost
differentials in regard to replacing the existing brick or using a completely
new brick type. This amendment was seconded and passed unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:55 P.M.
MD /se