Loading...
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.