Loading...
HDC_08 13 2018Page 1 of 16 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, August 13, 2018, 5:00 p.m. Board Room, City Hall Roll Call Quorum was present being six (6) in number. Members Present: Chair Ted Holder Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell Dick Kelley Dale Pekar Lauren Frederick Robert Hodge Members Absent: Amber Jones City Attorney: Sherri Latimer Staff Present: Brian Minyard Citizens Present: Tim Hankins Brent Hopkins Lindsey Boerner Crystal Boerner Mark Hinson Elaine Hinson Jennifer Herron Jeff Horton Denise Arnett Patricia Blick Approval of Minutes Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell made a motion to approve the July 9, 2018 minutes as amended with some missing commas. Commissioner Dele Pekar seconded and the motion passed with a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent (Jones). Notice requirements were met on all of the items except as noted in individual hearing items. Notice of public hearing was printed in a newspaper of general circulation, posted on the internet and emails were sent to interested citizens and the press to inform them of the agenda being posted online. Page 2 of 16 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax:(501) 399-3435 www.littlerock.gov STAFF REPORT ITEM NO. Two. DATE: August 13, 2018 APPLICANT: Mark and Elaine Hinson ADDRESS: 407 E Daisy Bates Drive FILE NUMBER: HDC18-014 COA REQUEST: Infill House PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 407 E Daisy Bates Drive. The property’s legal description is “East 65 feet of Lots 1 and 2, Block 54, Original City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas." This lot has been vacant since about 1999. The building was shown as demolished because of the 1999 tornado and is believed to have been removed shortly thereafter. Previously on this site was the Ziesler House, a single family building. This application is for an Infill house with detached garage to be built facing Daisy Bates Drive. PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE: On April 15, 1999, a COA was approved and issued to the City of Little Rock for demolition due to the structure being demolished by the 1999 tornado. On April 7, 1994, a COA was approved and issued to Joe Kuonen for a fence to be installed in the front yard. In the 1897 Sanborn, there was a dwelling at the corner of 14th and Rock (403 E 14th) with outbuildings were on the southeast corner of the lot in question. Note the entirety of lots 1 and 2 was combined at that time. 1897 is the earliest Sanborn map in Little Rock. Note these are fire insurance maps and the issue was fire safety and slate or metal was categorized as the same in fire retardants standards. Location of Project Page 3 of 16 On the 1913 map, the lot was subdivided into east and west. A one story house is shown at 407 E 14th with a shingle roof and a porch roof that was either metal or slate. A large outbuilding is on the south property line in addition to two other out buildings. In the 1939-1950 Sanborn maps, the house had a composition roof on all roofs. The outbuilding on the south property line was enlarged and is noted as automobile storage. The other two outbuildings were not shown. In the 1978 Survey map (An Architectural Survey of the MacArthur Park and Governor’s Mansion areas of the Quapaw Quarter), shows this house and large garage in the rear remaining. 1897 Sanborn Map (site is on upper left) 1913 Sanborn map 1939-1950 Sanborn maps 1978 Survey map The authority of the Little Rock Historic District Commission to review new construction in the district is authorized by the Sections 14-172-208 of the Arkansas state statute and is shown as an attachment at the end of this report. The authority of the Little Rock Historic District Commission to review new construction in the district is authorized by the Sections Sec. 23-115, Sec. 23-119, and Sec. 23-120 of the Little Rock Municipal code and is shown as an attachment at the end of this report. Page 4 of 16 The guidelines cover new construction of Residential structures on pages 31-41 under Section V. Design Guidelines for Detached New Construction of Primary and Secondary Buildings. Site Design is on pages 57-64 under Section VII Design Guidelines for Site Design and is shown as an attachment at the end of this report. 1978 survey photo 1994 file photo Front (north) façade Page 5 of 16 PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND GUIDELINES: SITING This house will be the second on this half block once it is constructed. The house will face Daisy Bates Drive as the original house did. Photos of that house are shown above. There has been an effort to match the front façade setback of this house with the house at 401 E Daisy Bates immediately to the west. The house is proposed to be set 13’ – 6” off of Daisy Bates and the front porch is to be within six inches of the house at 401. These front yard setbacks are fairly consistent with the setbacks on Rock Street, Daisy Bates and the surrounding area. New single family construction in the next block to the west has all been built at a 15’ build to line on street frontages (three single family houses). Note: the site plan has been revised to show six feet between the garage and the house. The garage was shifted six feet to the east towards the alley. This lot has been split and is not the original layout for the block. The original plat showed 50x140 lots running east to west. This lot is the eastern half of lots 1 and 2. Planning staff has determined that the Daisy Bates frontage will serve as the zoning front setback on the lot since that is the only street frontage that it has. Planning Staff has also approved a 10% administrative reduction in the front yard setback to match the setback along Daisy Bates with the new house next door. The rear yard setback on the south side of the lot has a 25’ setback for the primary structure. The side yards (east and west property lines) have 5 feet setbacks for primary structures. Side yard setbacks are at 5’ and 5.1’. This meets the zoning requirements for the district. Accessory structures have 3 foot setbacks on the side and rear yards, and 60 feet from the front. The garage/studio building has a 3’ rear yard setback and approximately 7’ setback form the alley. These setbacks meet the zoning requirements for this district. The house has a similar amount of site coverage with open grass area on the street frontages. The site Coverage is similar to the historic properties in the area but may be slightly more with the two car garage and attached studio space. The location of the garage at the rear corner of the property is consistent with the prevailing patterns of development within the area of influence of the subject property Surrounding properties left Project site Surrounding properties right Updated site plan Page 6 of 16 Across street left Across street Across street right The house at 1402 and 1410 Commerce have horizontal wood siding. The apartment building at 1422 Commerce has a painted brick finish. The house at 1410 Rock has horizontal wood siding and the apartment building at 1400 Rock is all brick. Infill houses in the area of influence have Hardie plank siding and metal siding. HEIGHT The height of this building is proposed to be approximately 26’5” tall, which is below the zoning requirement of 35 feet. The chimney is below this height. This height is comparable to the houses to the left and right and the historic one on the corner of Rock and Daisy Bates. PROPORTION The house is an ell shape with the one story portion parallel with Daisy Bates and the two story portion perpendicular to Daisy Bates Drive. This separates the roofing into two units and is accentuated with the lower metal roof between the two. The two story portion visually equals the mass of the one story portion. The verticalness of the windows and the spacing give a more traditional proportion to the structure. The houses on each side of this project are two stories. The house at 1402 Commerce is a large two story block while the house at 401 Daisy Bates is an ell shape as this one is. With the ell shape, the proposed house is wider than most houses in the area but fits between the two immediate neighbors. The north side of the street is vacant. The proportions of the windows are more vertical than the immediate area, but are not distracting. The west wall does have a low proportion of wall to void ratio. Additional windows on that side visible from the street would aid in reducing that proportion of overabundance of solid wall. RHYTHM The rhythm of door and windows on the front façade is harmonious and traditional in nature as is the east façade with its chimney and flanking windows. The west façade is not rhythmic in its placement of windows. The addition of more windows or moving one to be vertically aligned over the other would make this more orderly. SCALE The proposed building’s scale is between the large house at 1402 Commerce and the new house at 401 Daisy Bates. The separation of wings of the house lessens the scale of the house by dividing the mass into two different pieces. The 10/12 roof on the lower east wing visually gives that wing more height. Page 7 of 16 MASSING The massing of the historic house at 1402 Commerce is so large, that it overshadows any proposed or existing house on the block. This project aims for the middle ground between it and structures in the area and the new construction next door. By doing so, this allows the house to be compatible with the area. ENTRANCE AREA The Primary entrance faces Daisy Bates Drive. The front door will be a solid core flush metal door painted to match the dark bronze color of the windows. There will be a transom above the door and a wide sidelight to the left of the door. There will be a 1/12 pitch metal roof over the entry porch in bronze color. Painted metal columns will support the porch. Concrete steps will lead up to the porch. The porch is approximately 6’ by 8’-6”. Handrails will be a metal cable system. WALL AREAS The house is an ell shape with the rear wing being on the west side of the lot. The front elevation hints to this fact with the lower level of metal roofing that separates the two wings. The main house will be of ivory brick, in an off white tone. The foundation of the house will be approximately 2’-10” at the front of the house. The windows will be either Windsor or Quaker brand. The windows will be a vinyl window in dark bronze color. The windows on the front on the front of the house are placed traditionally, with three east of the door while the ones to the west on the two story portion are stacked vertically on top of each other with one in the attic space. These are four over four windows. The windows on the east wing are 3’-4” wide by 7’-6” tall. The windows on west wing are (from bottom) 3’-4” wide by 7’-6”, 3’-4” wide by 7’-0”, and in the attic 2’-6” wide by 2’-6”. Side (East) Elevation without fence (partial red flags point to windows remove or added). Front Door Detail Page 8 of 16 There will be two windows on the east side of the house flanking the fireplace. These windows will always be visible from the street because of the alley. The windows are 3’-4” wide by 7’-6” tall. The other east facing windows will be partially obscured from view by the fence around the patio. The partial red flags denote changes from the original submittal. One horizontal window was added to the garage building and one window was deleted form the interior patio area. Side (West) Elevation without fence (partial red flags point to windows remove or added). The windows on the west façade of the house will be visible from the street. There are only two windows on this façade. The windows are not aligned vertically with each other. The window openings are not oriented vertically and symmetrically within the west wall area as stated in the Guidelines. Ideally, there would be more windows on this side of the house. When viewing the interior plans of the house, the second floor window could be aligned with the lower master bath window to have a more traditional window arrangement. Historically, houses would have many more windows per side than two for a wall this large. The partial red flags denote changes from the original submittal. One horizontal window was added to the garage building but may not be seen from a street. The south façade of this house will not be as visible from Rock Street with the privacy fence and the detached garage. On the two story west wing, the windows are stacked vertically and placed in the corner of the mass. The sizes of the windows from the bottom to the top are 3’-4” wide by 7’-6” on the lower floor and 3’-4” wide by 6’-6” on the upper floor. There are three windows in the east wing that mirror those on the front of the house. The rhythm of the front of the house is very regular with windows and doors equally spaced in the mass. The land across the street is vacant. The windows on the house at 1402 Commerce are more regularly spaced and stacked as is the historic apartment building at Rock and Daisy Bates. Some windows in the house are single ones and other are ganged. The use of single windows is on the more public sides of the house. The windows clearly identify floor elevations in the house. Page 9 of 16 The garage is proposed with metal siding and trim in a Meridian Panel by McElroy Meatal in dark bronze color. This is a standing seam roofing system with 12” width panels that will be used on the walls. This is the same metal that is being proposed on the front porch roof and the hyphen between the wings. On Page 38 of the guidelines it states that it is appropriate to “Employ exterior materials that are present on buildings within the area of influence” and to “Employ modern exterior materials that closely resemble the proportions, rhythm, scale, and mass of exterior materials that are present on buildings within the area of influe nce. This Meridian metal roofing applied as siding does neither of these two. With the principal building materials in the area of influence being horizontal wood siding or brick, this material is not appropriate. Meridian Flat pan standing seam roof There are two windows in the garage. One will face the alley on the east side of the structure and one on the west side that may not be visible from Rock Street. The window on the garage is a 6’-0” wide by 2’-0” tall. This casement window will be visible from the street and is contrary to the guideline on page 37 that says: it is inappropriate to: Orient window openings horizontally in a primary wall area. An example would be a modern strip window set high above finished floors which are out of proportion and rhythm within the district. One or more individual square windows would be more appropriate. The garage is proposed to have a flush panel garage door with no windows in black or dark bronze color. Brick Color Garage doors Windows ROOF AREA The roofing proposed on the bulk of the house and the garage is an architectural shingle by CertainTeed in a Weatherwood color. A composition shingle is prevalent in the area of influence. The front porch and a section of the house running north-south between the wings will be the Meridian Panel by McElroy Meatal in dark bronze color. See photos above in Wall Area section. Page 10 of 16 The pitch of the roof for the shingled areas is a 10/12 and the pitch for the metal roof varies from 1/12 at the front porch to 3/12 on the rear porch and house. There are no dormers shown on the plan. Trim on the soffit and fascia of the house are minimal and are noted to be 10” deep. The Meridian roof provided by McElroy is shown below. It does not have a flat pan as the one shown on the right. Historically, the standing seam roofs had a flat pan in the middle, no ribs or ridges. FAÇADE The front and east façades are the most traditional of the house and they are the most public sides. These facades will be all brick with large regularly spaced windows. Brick has been a mainstay building material in the district for homes built within the period of significance. DETAILING Detailing on this house is minimal. An infill house should not have overly detailed bargeboards or trim around doors and windows. The plans do not show trim around the doors and windows, but a smaller brick stop trim or something similar will be used to bridge the gap between the brick and the windows. The soffit and fascia are noted as painted wood trim. This level of trim is appropriate for an infill house. The elevations do show a soldier course header above the windows and a rowlock sill below. It appears that the brick elevations will continue to the ground level without any separation between foundation and wall. The chimney is proposed on the east end of the house near the alley. It is shown as a rectangular mass with a metal spark arrestor on the top. No details are given on the spark arrestor other than to be of a dark bronze finish. The metal cable system to be used for the handrail at the front porch could be considered to be a minimalist design meant to fade into the background. With the brick cheek wall extending past the steps, it will be somewhat obscured. SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGIES No sustainable technologies were noted on the plan or application. SITE DESIGN: SIDEWALKS: There is an existing brick walk along Daisy Bates. The new walk from the entry to the street should be poured to the edge of it without removing the existing brick sidewalk. The concrete walk as well as the concrete driveway at the garage should be a broom finish in standard color. PLANNED GREEN SPACE: There will be lawn area to the north and east of the house. A large magnolia tree and a crepe myrtle may be in the right of way but are not noted on the survey. Care should be taken if these trees are to be Roof shingles Original brick sidewalk Page 11 of 16 saved. FENCES AND RETAINING WALLS: There are no existing fences on the property. A Trex fence is proposed in the back yard areas to match the neighbors to the west. It will be six feet tall and start near the rear of the west façade (more than halfway) and continue around the back yard to the garage obscuring most of the south façade with the fence. This fence will hide the condensing unit from the street. A separate fence will enclose the patio area on the east side abutting the alley. That fence will run from the corner of the house to the corner of the garage. LIGHTING Lighting for the front porch will be ‘simple in form and size’. The lighting should not be visible from the street view. Security lighting, such as flood lights, should intrude as little as possible on the integrity of the neighborhood. They should be mounted on secondary and rear facades. Shields should focus the light down, not at neighboring property. RESIDENTIAL PARKING: Off street parking shall be in the garage located off the alley or between the alley and the garage doors. The driveway is proposed to be concrete approximately twenty plus feet wide. CURB CUTS: No additional curb cuts are proposed. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND SERVICE AREAS The condensing unit for the air conditioning unit is proposed to be behind the six foot tall privacy fence that surrounds the rear yard. Electrical and gas meters and other mechanical equipment should be located on the rear façade of the house or the south façade of the garage. Satellite Dishes: The applicant is not requesting a satellite dish. Recreational Structures: The swimming pool will be located in the rear yard and screened with a six foot tall fence. Trex fence of 401 Daisy Bates Proposed lighting Page 12 of 16 Rear (South) Elevation without fence SUMMARY OF PRE-APPLICATION HEARING The applicant attended the April 27, 2018 pre application meeting. The comments from the commissioners are summarized as follows: • SITING – front yard setback seems close, verify surrounding setbacks; generally okay. • HEIGHT – verify max height, adjust accordingly. • PROPORTION – Design appears to be proportional, provide elevations with surrounding context; generally okay. • RHYTHM – rhythm of windows is off, heights, sizes and spacing varies widely; west side windows especially more consistent design • SCALE – okay; okay • MASSING – okay; okay • ENTRANCE AREA – okay; front door and sidelight seem oversized for entrance area. • WALL AREAS – okay; decide on exterior materials, prefer to see multiple materials vs all brick. • ROOF AREA – okay; okay. • FAÇADE – okay; okay. • DETAILING – take a look and give some thought; need to decide on exterior materials. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS: The project is appropriate in the following sections: Siting, Height, Scale, Massing, Entrance Area, Roof Area, Façade, Detailing, and Site Design. The project could be more appropriate in the areas of Proportion, Rhythm, and Wall areas, by modifying the following: Page 13 of 16 1) Adjusting the windows on the west side of the house preferably by adding additional windows near the front of the house or at least aligning the windows vertically with each other. This is contrary to the statement on page 37 of the Guidelines to “Orient window and door openings vertically and symmetrically within a given wall area. 2) The siding choice on the detached garage is a material that was not typically used for siding on walls historically in the neighborhood. On Page 38 of the guidelines it states that it is appropriate to “Employ exterior materials that are present on buildings within the area of influence” and to “Employ modern exterior materials that closely resemble the proportions, rhythm, scale, and mass of exterior materials that are present on buildings within the area of influence. This Meridian metal roofing applied as siding does neither of these two. With the principal building materials in the area of influence being horizontal wood siding or brick, this material is not appropriate. 3) There are two windows in the garage. One will face the alley on the east side of the structure and one on the west side that may not be visible from Rock Street. The window on the garage is a 6’-0” wide by 2’-0” tall. This casement window will be visible from the street and is contrary to the guideline on page 37 that says: it is inappropriate to: Orient window openings horizontally in a primary wall area. An example would be a modern strip window set high above finished floors which are out of proportion and rhythm within the district. One or more individual square windows would be more appropriate. To make the project more appropriate, the garage could be bricked or choosing another siding choice. Historically, garages and principal structures did not always match and some were different materials on different sides depending if they were visible from the street. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no comments regarding this application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions: 1. Obtaining a building permit. 2. Any changes to the elevations of the building in any phase of the permitting process to be reviewed by Staff. 3. No electric meters, hvac equipment, cable boxes, satellite dishes, or other utility equipment to be installed on street facing facades. 4. Add a window to the west façade on the lower floor near the front setback or align the proposed two windows vertically. 5. Change siding material on the garage to one that was historically used in the area of influence. 6. Modify window on the east wall of the garage to a square window or three individual windows. COMMISSION ACTION: August 13, 2018 Brian Minyard, Staff, made a presentation to the Commission. There were no questions from the Commissioners to Staff. Staff received one call on the application of an informational nature. Mark Hinson stated that they were going to add a window to the west wall of the house. The window would be in the hallway on the second floor on top of the one on the first floor. On the east wall of the garage, they were going to delete the window. On the west side, they replaced the window with a 3 foot wide door with a full lite window. This door will be visible from the Page 14 of 16 courtyard. Mr. Minyard said that the window on the west side of the garage was not an issue to Staff. Mr. Hinson said that they would like to fight for the siding on the garage. Chair Holder asked if the vertical metal siding was only on the garage. Mr. Hinson said yes. Photos of garages and siding in the area were provided to the Commission and Staff. Mr. Hinson said that they would have architectural shingles on the roof. There was a discussion of some of the photos. Jennifer Herron, architect, said that they went around the MacArthur Park district and took photos of wood board and batten siding. She said that there is some metal used in the area with metal siding. This is an accessory structure, not the principal structure. For the garage, she would like to have the option of using the standing seam panel on the garage. Mr. Minyard referred the Commission to the photo on page eight of the staff report. Jennifer Herron provided photos of wood board and batten in MacArthur Park and in other areas. Jeff Horton stated that they could get the flat pan metal siding if it was desired. They color is proposed to be dark bronze to match the trim in the windows. Chair Holder stated that he thought that the flat pan may fit in better. Lindsey Boerner, 401 E Daisy Bates, spoke in favor of the proposal and commented that it was a beautiful design. Patricia Blick, QQA Executive Director, stated that she was endorsing the application and feels that the siding is a modern interpretation of the material. Chair Holder asked her if she would prefer the flat pan or one with striations. She replied that it was a secondary building without direct street frontage and that either would work. The color did not bother her and prefers this color over any color such as a galvalume or galvanized finish. Commissioner Dale Pekar has trouble with the overall design of building. The one story portion is disproportionate for the 2 story section. When looking at the house, it appears that the house is two stories and that the garage portion is to the east and was later converted to living quarters. He felt that the two masses were jarring. He commented what size the porch columns were and thought they were undersized. He stated that they should not be smaller than 4x4’” posts. Are the windows muntins placed internally? He feels that these windows will look like they have storm windows placed over them. He would prefer that the muntins be on the exterior of the glass. He cannot see the metal cable for the porch railing as appropriate for use in the district. Commissioner Pekar asked about the fence on the west side of the house. Mr. Minyard clarified that it was the fence at the back yard but with elevations, they appear to be closer that in reality. Chair Holder commented that elevations can be tricky because it looks like the garage was attached to the house, but it is not. Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell wanted to clarify one point on Wall Area. The guidelines state that in general, it is appropriate to orient window and door openings vertically and symmetrically in a given wall area. He stated that this did refer to stacking windows but instead referred to the individual sizes and shapes of the windows. He did not think that Staff interpreted the guidelines correctly. He continued that the two windows on the west side clearly identify the floor elevations and he feels that it is symmetrical with a solid, a void, a solid. He stated that we Page 15 of 16 do not design the interior of the house. He feels the siding mimics the board and batten with modern interpretation. He agrees with the strip windows in the garage. Chair Holder asked if the applicant wanted to amend his application. Mr. Hinson said that they had added the window on the west side of the house as a compromise, but it they could not add it, they would not. They would like to drop the window on the east side of the garage and modify the garage west window to a door. Mr. Minyard asked to clarify the application. The applicants officially changed his application delete the east window in the garage and change the west window in the garage to a door. Vice Chair Russell added that he agreed with Commissioner Pekar that the muntins on the windows should be on the exterior of the glass. He feels that it would be more appropriate for the district. He did not have an issue with the cable handrail. Chair Holder stated that he saw the applicant agree to the window muntins to be on the exterior of the glass. He asked if Mr. Hinson agreed and he said yes. Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell made a motion to approve the application at 407 E Daisy Bates as amended with staff recommendations 1, 2 and 3. Commissioner Robert Hodge seconded. Chair Holder stated that he was okay with the two windows on the west side of the house since it faced the other house. He said he did not agree with Vice Chair Russell’s reading of the guidelines. Chair Holder said that he did not agree with Vice Chair Russell on the windows. The motion passed with 5 ayes, 1 no (Pekar) and 1 absent (Jones). Other Matters Enforcement issues Staff reported that they were still working on the enforcement on 8th and Sherman. The tenant came in to talk and maybe filing an application. She was informed that the landlord would have to approve the application. Mr. Minyard emailed the owner that information but has not heard from either of them since. Certificates of Compliance A spreadsheet was distributed to the Commission earlier. A COC was issued for 1410 Rock Street for siding repair, repaint, etc. 407 E th Street is a tax credit project with new heat and air systems with the units being placed on the back of the building. 624 Ferry Street is for renovating the front door. Citizen Communication There were no citizens that chose to speak during citizen communication. Chair Holder stated that this was Commissioner Dick Kelley's last hearing and wanted to thank him for his service to the city. Adjournment There was a motion to adjourn and the meeting ended at 5:42 p.m. Attest: Chair Date Secretry/Staff Date Page 16 of 16