Loading...
HDC_09 04 1997LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES 4 September 1997 Commissioners Present: John Bush Howard H. Gordon John Greer Charles Marratt Julie Wiedower Staff Present: V.Anne Guthrie Tim Polk Guests Present: Cheri Nichols Prior to the meeting, the appointment of Howard H. Gordon to the Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC) was announced; he was introduced and represents the at-large commission member. The meeting was called to order and roll was taken. As there was a quorum, the minutes from the August meeting were approved. The following Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application, which was deferred previously due to no quorum, was deferred by the applicant until further notification: Applicant: Lawrence lbekwe Address: 1310 -1312 Scott Street Request: New construction of a community cultural facility (ca. 4,823 square feet) with associated parking Commissioner Wiedower suggested that a joint process be established for review of applications when property is located within the overlapping three-block area of both the MacArthur Park Historic District and the Capitol Zoning District. Guthrie stated that she and Lynne B. Zollner, Capitol Zoning District staff, had discussed the possibility as there is another COA application (located within the overlapping area) requiring approval from both commissions. In the review of new construction and adjacent property owner notification, a joint meeting of the two commissions serves both the applicant and commissioners better in that it minimizes duplication of efforts and a clear line of review is delineated. Chair Bush altered the agenda to allow the last agenda item to be heard next: Applicant: Steve Adams Address: 904 Rock Street Request: Rehabilitate structure's exterior and construct a new garage in the rear of the property and a new perimeter fence Adams presented his application by stating that the front facade will not be changed; however, there are plans to have the front porch spindles replaced with more appropriate ones and all windows to be repaired only. Most of the rehabilitation work on the house is to meet code regulations. Little Rock Historic District Commission Minutes of 4 September 1997, Page 2 A six-foot privacy fence is planned for the backyard with gates on the north and south sideyards. New construction of a garage in the vicinity of the demolished one is proposed for the backyard along the alley, the property's northwest corner. There was discussion regarding garage setbacks. Wiedower asked whether the LRHDC has jurisdiction over the design of a garage that is located in the rear and is not "seen from the street." As legal counsel was absent from the meeting, it would be decided at a later date. Commissioner Greer made a motion that the six-foot privacy fence in the rear be approved; however, the proposed picket fence in the front yard requires additional design information, which must be submitted to staff for approval. A vote was taken and all approved the motion. Commissioner Gordon made a motion that, should garage construction require a COA , the garage be approved dependent on the submittal of additional plans (with measurements, scale, etc). A vote was taken and all approved the motion. The last agenda item and COA application for the public hearing was: Applicant: Jerry McKinnis Address: 1304 Cumberland Street Request: Construct a new office building, as an expansion and as a secondary structure to adjacent business Prior to the presentation, Marratt recused himself from the meeting. The owner's agent, Mike McKinnis, presented the application, stating that the new construction serves as an expansion to the existing office at 1302 Cumberland; the new construction should be classified as an outbuilding or secondary structure to the adjacent building. Greer stated that the proposal should be considered as primary construction, as it is the sole improvement on the platted lot and should not be treated as a secondary structure. There was discussion about whether the proposal was considered as primary or secondary, as there are differences between the two in the MacArthur Park Historic Park design guidelines. For primary buildings, emphasis is on the structure's shape, scale, how its fits into the existing street pattern, its orientation to the street, location of entrances, etc. For secondary structures, new construction should be smaller in scale than the primary, located closer to the alley (or the rear of the lot) and be compatible in design, shape and roof shape. As a primary building, Greer stated that the proposed north porch could be wrapped around the building to the east facade, so the street elevation facade would have the appearance of a porch; this suggestion is in keeping with the guidelines for primary structures. Also landscaping would soften the new construction. Wiedower stated that she interprets the new construction as a primary building. Cheri Nichols stated that as a secondary building, it was a bit large but wasn't Little Rock Historic District Commission Minutes of 4 September 1997, Page 3 sure how it was to be resolved, what with both the Capitol Zoning District Commission and the LRHDC having jurisdiction over the proposed project and having their separate design criteria. It was recommended that the COA request be continued until the next LRHDC meeting, and perhaps by that time, a solution can be reached as to whether the request should be considered as a secondary or primary structure. It was recommended that the applicant come back with the wrap-around porch on the east facade and with landscaping. As the site is located within two districts, the Capitol Zoning and the MacArthur Park Historic, it will be necessary to have approval of both entities prior to construction. A joint hearing with the two governing commissions for this requested project is necessary so that both entities would be in agreement, and if there is any disagreement as to design (i.e., whether it is a primary or secondary structure), then the applicant would not have to bounce back and forth between the two commissions. As there was no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. (NOTE: The tape recorder did not record at all; these minutes were taken from written notes.)