Loading...
HDC_11 29 1999City of Little Rock HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 29 NOVEMBER 1999 MINUTES LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Commissioners Present: John Greer, Chair Howard H. Gordon Jean Ann Phillips Mark Zoeller Commissioners Absent: Wyatt Weems Staff: V. Anne Guthrie Anthony Black The meeting of the Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC) was called to order. Roll call was taken; as there was a quorum, the minutes were approved unanimously. The Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application, a deferred agenda item, was: Applicant: T and C Properties, LLC Address: 415 East 9th Street Request: Remove artificial siding; rehabilitate exterior; replace soffit and fascia; install new windows, roof, deck and driveway Property owner Eric McDuffie presented the deferred application and addressed specific items for clarification. The requested additional information was in the form of elevations, sketches and profiles. The deck in the rear was reviewed; it is on the second story with sole access from an apartment. The balusters for the railing were discussed. Greer stated that since the railing is new and required by code, that instead of the proposed turned railing, they should be 1" x 1" or 1 ½" x 1 ½" pickets and the newel post be 4" x 4". The decking is a type of roll top that's melted down. There was discussion about wooden decking, but clearance onto deck is an issue. McDuffie stated that the roof would have architectural shingles. The retaining wall is to be repaired and not replaced. The driveway slope, behind the retaining wall, will be cement due to erosion; the parking lot will be shat and aggregate. Parking was designated on a preliminary site plan along with the driveway; there will be one entry from the alley and the driveway will be the exit; eleven ( 11) parking spaces are planned. The landscaping for the parking area, which is required, will be azaleas along the front or north elevation. Little Rock Historic District Commission 29 November 1999 Minutes, Page 2 The steel siding will be removed and any pre-existing wooden siding will be repaired or replaced with wooden, to match the existing profile. There are about five different kinds of windows; he reviewed their profile and sashes, etc. Wooden windows will be one-over-one sashes. The fascia and soffit will be replaced with like-kind materials and construction; the box gutters will be repaired. No chimney repairs are planned. Greer asked that the staff recommendations be read into the record; also, he asked that the following items be included on the conditions: (1) on fascia and soffit, like material replacement will be wood; (2) deck and railing will 1" balusters, square with 4" x 4" posts, 6" on center to meet code; (3) roof will be architectural shingles; and (4) driveway will be cement and rebar for entry way curb. Staff recommendations are: ♦should be project scope change in any fashion in terms of material, massing, scale, profile and size, staff will be notified and appropriate actions taken; ♦the project must meet all city codes and regulations, including rental inspection, parking, etc. and appropriate approvals must be obtained prior to occupancy; ♦the curb cut and driveway must meet city code regulations (including landscaping); ♦the driveway shall be one way only with a sign (meeting regulations) stating such; ♦the right-of-way on the south side of 9th Street shall be clear of visual distractions such as garbage canisters and parked cars. Gordon made a motion that, contingent on previous conditions and staff recommendations, the project request for 415 East 9th be approved; it passed unanimously. The next agenda item, the demolition of 1422 Rock, was deferred as no one was available to present the request to the LRHDC. Under Old business, the non-compliant COA at 1000 Rock, approved in 1998, was discussed. Staff presented the application and what was approved. Part of the COA request was to install new windows on the front (east) elevation, on the porch, and replace the inappropriate aluminum windows. The approved windows were to be wooden, a floor-to-ceiling type; they would emulate the Bragg cottage on Scott in terms of size and proportion, as both structures are about the approximate age and architectural style. The owner's representative, Betty Deislinger, confirmed that the two windows, while emulating the others in width and height, are vinyl windows. NOTE: Vinyl is an inappropriate material and they have snap-on mullions, which are not recommended in the design guidelines. The substituted windows were not approved by either staff or the LRHDC prior to their installation. Deislinger stated that the vinyl windows were installed as code did not allow windows to extend to the floor and the wooden ones were too expensive. She stated that it did not occur to her to seek LRHDC or staff approval prior to their installation. There was discussion on enforcement, procedures, design guidelines and interpretation of the exterior appearances of structures, as viewed from the street. With the rehabilitation of older houses, attention to details, such as windows, is a significant architectural aspect. If one owner is allowed to install vinyl windows, then the next owner will be able to do so. It was recommended Little Rock Historic District Commission 29 November 1999 Minutes, Page 3 that action on this non-compliant COA be deferred until the next meeting, when the windows can be reviewed in person and with the applicant. A decision as to the enforcement, etc. will be made after the windows have been reviewed and discussed. The next non-conforming COA was 1001 Cumberland, approved in 1997. Staff presented a brief summary of the application request. Property owner, Wali Caradine, presented the COA request, which was the construction of a two-storied garage in the rear yard. The project had the approval of the Zoning Board of Adjustment; subsequent exterior changes were made by this board. Caradine reviewed the structure and the difference in its siding; instead of the approved wooden board anl batten, wooden shiplap was installed as the finishing material. There is a difference in construction and its visual impact. Photos depicting the project were passed around; they showed the garage in connection with the home, adjacent structures and the street. The materials were difficult to obtain and expensive, and the construction deadlines made it difficult to obtain the board and batten. Caradine stated that he knew to notify the LRHDC of changes; he intended to come before them at a later date with other issues, such as the fence, etc. There was discussion regarding process, material change and whether it warranted notification of adjacent owners. While the change only was in the construction method, the finishing material of wood; however, for Greer, the construction method is a significant change. It was agreed that Caradine would notify property owners within 150' of the change and provide staff with proof of notification. The regular property notice form would not be used, as it must state why he is giving notification of the change and why he was before the LRHDC; staff will provide assistance in preparing the document. Also, on the agenda was 920 Scott, which is non-compliant due to the asphalting of the driveway. As the owner could not attend due to a funeral, she will try to attend the next meeting. The last agenda item under non-compliant CO As was 514 East 9th, installation of a chain link fence in a rear yard. A permit was obtained for the fence, but LRHDC staff did not approve the permit, as is the usual process. Property owner, Jay Core, stated that in the rear yard of his property at 512 E. 9th, a 26' wooden fence and gate were installed; as part of the permit, a 35' chain link fence was installed to the east and connected with an existing chain link fence. As determined by legal, the installed chain link can be seen from 9th Street. Also, the fence does not meet the criteria of the design guidelines, which state that chain link may be "located in rear yards where not readily visible from the street if dark green or black and screened with hedge, ivy or other creeping cover." Gordon proposed that the case be deferred until each commissioner has the opportunity to view the chain link and determine its visual impact from the street. Other items on the agenda were: the LRHDC meeting schedule for the upcoming year 2000 was adopted unanimously; and an orientation meeting date was tentatively set for Thursday, 16 December. As there was no other business, the LRHDC meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.