Loading...
HDC_04 13 2000City of Little Rock HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 13 APRIL 2000 MINUTES LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Commissioners Present: John Greer, Chair Howard H. Gordon Jean Ann Phillips Wyatt Weems Commissioners Absent: Mark Zoeller 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 first Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application was: Applicant: City of Little Rock, Curran Hall Address: 615 East Capitol Avenue Request: Rehabilitation & relocation of structures, reconstruction of two- storied kitchen and parking lot on East 6th Street (NOTE: as Greer is an employee of the Witsell Evans & Rasco architectural firm, he recused himself from the application hearing). The architect for Curran's rehabilitation, Charles Witsell, presented the project's request and discussed the overall approach to rehabilitating the historic structure to its original construction date, ca. 1842. The main entrance to the structure is from 6th Street, with a parking lot on the structure's south side. Witsell reiterated the proposed site plan for the structure as a welcome center with the reconstructed two-storied kitchen on the southwest as offices and restrooms; the one-storied office, which is attached to the structure's southeast comer, will be removed and converted into an outbuilding for storage and interpretation. The proposed use of Curran was discussed with the eastern rooms as the primary visitor's information area and the western side for exhibits; the back porch connects with the two-storied kitchen. Witsell explained the historical and architectural significance and documentation of kitchens as detached buildings and the reasoning of a two-storied kitchen on Curran's southwest side. He Little Rock Historic District Commission 13 April 2000 Minutes, Page 2 reviewed documentation of the kitchen site, which is primarily from oral tradition and described the historical setting and site arrangement of outbuildings as they relate to Curran. He listed several historical resources, which were utilized for documenting the roof types, location and proportion of Curran and its support outbuildings. Photographs illustrated city outbuildings, several of which were two-storied kitchens; also, photos document sizes, shapes and locations of specific and generic structures. Staff recommendations were read to approve the project request with conditions that: (1) all work follow the architectural plans as submitted; (2) progress reports submitted to the various entities involved in the project; (3) all repairs meet city code and regulations, as well as approval of the state Historic Preservation Program; (4) should the scope of work change, other than what is submitted, staff is notified prior to implementation and appropriate actions taken. Phillips made a motion to approve the request as presented aud with staff recommendations; it was seconded and approved unanimously. The next Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application for consideration was: Applicant: Christopher Pratt Address: 308 East 14th Street Request: Rehabilitation of structure into a single-family home The applicant, as owner, presented his request to rehabilitate the structure and convert it from multi-into single-family; it was vacant for several years. There are plans to close some doors, windows, etc, which were utilized for the apartments. Photographs of the each elevation illustrated the highlighted areas of features that would be removed or altered. His contractor was not present for detailed explanations. The proposed work per elevation was discussed. Regarding the modifications --some windows and doors will be closed if not original and some remain as is or converted to previous use. The next issue was the locations of the two a/c units; one on the east elevation along the alley and the second unit on the roof on the structure's rear. There was much discussion about the roof mounted unit in regards to weight and primarily visual perspective. Gordon emphasized the need for better rehab plans to ensure that the guidelines are followed and what is requested, is what will be done. There was a motion to defer the request until the next meeting in order to allow for a more detailed work description; it was approved unanimously. The last Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application was: Applicant: Debby T. Nye, agent Address: 521 East 6th Street Request: Application of artificial siding and new construction of driveway on East 6th Street As agent, Nye presented the request in two parts or sections, the artificial siding and the new construction of a driveway. The 1940s structure has asbestos siding as the sole exterior finish. Little Rock Historic District Commission 13 April 2000 Minutes, Page 3 The siding company agent detailed the project, such as soffits, windows, siding style, etc. Greer stated that the district's guidelines have a policy for artificial siding application, which must be sent to the agent. There was a motion to approve the request for vinyl siding; it was approved unanimously. (NOTE: Gordon left the meeting) The second part of the request was the new construction of a driveway on 6th Street. Nye reviewed the site and the need for a driveway. The property was accessed previously from adjacent property driveways; now, fencing is on three sides of the subject lot. There is wooden privacy fence in the rear, or the south, which is parking for apartments; there is a wooden fence on the west extending from the front/sidewalk to the rear of the lot; and a chain link fence on the east for about 50 feet or so. The east and west fences were installed within the past year; the wooden was approved administratively and the chain link installed without approval. The subject lot is unique in that it is nonconforming (43' wide) and the structure is sited on the very rear of the property; the lot depth is ca. 154' and there is no alley. There is a small incline from the sidewalk down to the street; two trees are on each side of where the driveway is planned. There is no curb cut. They park their cars in the front yard by the iron fence, which is missing a section; this missing section provides access to their parking and lot. Two proposals were presented, each with parking in the front yard. It is planned to have a 20' x 15' pad against the iron fence and sidewalk on the property's northwest side. Discussion focused on several aspects of the request --the fences, trees along the lot line, ROW, site layout, off-­ street parking, parking pad and different aspects of each proposal. It was stated that the second proposal was preferred; it has colored concrete and landscaping between the sidewalk and the concrete pad to soften the visual perspective. It was decided that a curb cut must be installed. It was agreed that better drawings would be provided to staff illustrating the preferred option with landscaping. Weems made a motion to approve request as presented with the above-agreed upon conditions; it was approved unanimously. Under new business, there was discussion about 920 Rock and its proposed improvements; the extent of improvements on the exterior was discussed, and it was decided that the owner should come before the LRHDC for approval. As there was no other business, the LRHDC meeting adjourned at 6: 15 p.m.