HDC_08 07 1997LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
7 August 1997
Commissioners Present:
John Bush John Greer Charles Marratt
Commissioners Absent: Tommy Jameson Julie Wiedower
Staff Present: Tim Polk Anthony Black
Guests Present: Cheri Nichols
The meeting of the Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC) was called to
order and roll was taken. Since there was a quorum, the minutes from the July
commission meeting were approved.
A Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application deferred from the July meeting was:
Applicant: Lawrence lbekwe
Address: 1310 -1312 South Scott Street
Request: New construction of a community cultural facility
(ca. 4,823 square feet) with associated parking
It was discussed that Commissioner Greer would recuse himself from discussion of the
application due to a conflict of interest. At the July meeting, both Greer and Jameson
had recused themselves from the public hearing due to conflicts of interest. With two
commissioners absent from this meeting and one absent from the discussion, there was
no quorum for a public hearing on this application.
Black recommended (and according to the city ordinance) that the LRHDC establish a
time frame for the deferred COA until such time as the commission has a quorum of its
members to hear the agenda item. With two commissioners recused from this agenda
item public hearing and the absence of another commissioner, it has been difficult
obtaining a quorum of members in order to vote. Polk mentioned that Jameson's
replacement will be voted on by the Board of Directors at their 2 September meeting;
this appointment may facilitate the application review. Therefore, the COA is deferred
until there is a quorum of the LRHDC.
Little Rock Historic District Commission
Minutes of 7 August 1997, Page 2
The second COA application and agenda item scheduled for a public hearing was:
Applicant: Lynette and Fred Nelson
Address: 1414 S. Rock Street
Request: Renovate the structure's interior and exterior to its original
appearance, converting it from multiple to single family
structure
The applicant, Fred Nelson, went over his plans for the structure's rehabilitation. He
stated that the asbestos siding will be removed and replaced with clapboarded siding.
The front porch's north end, which was altered earlier to accommodate the apartments,
will not be removed unless grant monies are available. The house's exterior will be
restored as much to the original appearance as possible with the front window restored
to its original configuration and inappropriate windows replaced. A new asphalt
shingled roof is also planned. Nelson stated that the house will retain as much of the
original architectural features, both interior and exterior, as possible. An early photo of
the house (ca.1869), included in the LRHDC's packets, was distributed.
Marratt asked about the front porch section that had been altered; it is an area of about
8' x 8' that was enclosed to allow for the installation of kitchens when the house
converted to apartments. Nelson estimated that it will cost about $50,000 to remove
the enclosure and return the porch to its original late 19th-century configuration.
Discussion focused on porch details such as the railing, fretwork, etc.
The applicant will perform most of the rehabilitation work and will replace only where
necessary. Some of the turned posts on the porch railing are original and will be
replicated. The subject of reproduction costs for posts, railings, etc. was raised by
Marratt; he recommended a mill that did good work at reasonable costs (Walnut Fork in
Russellville, owned by John Alexander).
There was discussion about how the original sashed windows will be utilized. Greer
stated that the information in the COA application packet mentioned aluminum
windows. While aluminum windows are not appropriate in the historic district, they may
be used as storm windows. Also, Greer recommended an architecturally graded
asphalt shingle for the new roof.
As there were no further questions about, or objections to, the COA application, Greer
made a motion that the COA be approved based on "removing aluminum frame
windows from the application." The motion was seconded and a vote taken; it was
unanimously approved.
As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned.