Loading...
HDC_04 10 2006DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 723 West Markham Street Little Rock Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: 501 371-4790 Fax: 501 399-3435 LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTE RECORD Monday, April 10, 2006, 5:00 p.m. Sister Cities' Conference Room, City Hall I. Roll Call A Quorum was present being four (4) in number. Members Present: Carolyn Newbern Marshall Peters Wesley Walls Kay Tatum Members Absent: Job Serebrov City Attorney: Deborah Weldon Staff Present: Brian Minyard Citizens Present: Bill Reddig Karen Butler Reddig Boyd Maher, AHPP II. Approval of Minutes Minutes of February 13, 2006. Chair Newbern added that on page 2 in the second paragraph of 1301 Cumberland, the motion was made by "Job Serebrov". On page 2, at the bottom of the page add "concerning the new guidelines" the end of the first sentence. On page 3, change the word addressed to addresses in the next to the last paragraph. The meeting was adjourned at 7:15. No other additions or corrections were made. Commissioner Marshall Peters made a motion to approve, and Commissioner Wesley Walls seconded. The motion was approved with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. Minutes of March 13, 2006. 1 The minutes of March 13, 2006 had items that were not included in the minutes as presented. Staff will add those items to the minutes and present the minutes at the next public hearing for a vote. A motion was made to vote on the minutes at the next hearing by Commissioner Marshall Peters and was seconded by Commissioner Kay Tatum. The motion was approved with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. A motion was made to waive the bylaws to hear a presentation by Mike Madell from the National Park Service. The motion was made by Commissioner Wesley Walls to hear the presentation at this time and was seconded by Commissioner Kay Tatum. The motion was approved with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. Item VI b. Mike Madell spoke about upcoming events in preparation of the 50-year anniversary of the desegregation of Central High. He handed out an information sheet that included several projects. A Save Americas Treasures Grant went to re -roof the building and HVAC improvements. The reflecting pool was restored and handicap access was included in the new restoration. Another grant was just received to restore the landscaping in the front of the school. This landscaping will be phased and mostly installed after the anniversary events. They are also working on a Cultural Landscape Report ad hope to have that report finished later this summer. A Central High School Desegregation Commemorative Coin will be issued to recognize the 50th anniversary. Parks of the benefits will go back to the neighborhood for restoration projects. A new Visitor Center will be breaking ground soon and is scheduled to be opened by September 2007. The Historic Mobil Station is scheduled to be come an education center. He also handed out a color rendering of the proposed visitor center. Commissioner Marshall Peters asked a question about the location of the new visitor center. Chair Carolyn Newbern made a comment that the rendering shows that the color of the building materials of the new visitors center appear to reflect the existing building materials of the school with a more streamlined design. Mike Madell commented that they wanted to streamline the design without duplicating the original design. Commissioner Wesley Walls asked what the taller roof structure was. Mike Madell stated that it covered the lobby and entrance area and described the layout of the building. Parking and dumpsters are to be placed behind the building. Chair Newbern asked about the items that were in front of the Planning Commission for five houses on Park Street and what the status of those were. Tony Bozynski stated that they added a number of conditions. Before it went to the board, Staff worked with Mike Madell and added more conditions before the Board of Directors approved it. The work was to make the 2 project not disrupt the cultural landscape of the area. Tony Bozynski is assuming that it is a real project but no building permits have been granted. Mike Madell also brought additional brochures for the public. It was noted Boyd Maher from AHPP was present. III. Finding of Compliance with Notice Requirements of all Subjects Non-applicable. IV. Deferred Certificates of Appropriateness: a. None V. New Certificates of Appropriateness: 507 East Eighth Street 3 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 STAFF REPORT ITEM NO. 1. DATE: April 10, 2006 APPLICANT: Marshall Peters ADDRESS: 507 East Eight COA Removal of Aluminum siding - restoration, repair and replacement as REQUEST: needed of original wood clapboard siding PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 507 East Eight. The property's legal description is part of lot 0, Block 5 Johnson's Addition to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas." The structure at 507 East Eighth Street is a ca. 1903 building with the front porch remodeled in the Craftsman Style. It is a non - contributing structure because of the artificial siding. PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE: On December 4, 2003, a COA was approved and issued to Marshall Peters to rebuild a concrete block retaining wall along sidewalk and to install central heat and air. Location of Project ANALYSIS: The Design Guidelines' Artificial Siding Policy states items relevant to this case: Section V-35. of the Design Review Guidelines (1996 Edition), adopted by the Little Rock Historic District Commission (Commission), is amended as follows: 4 A. Siding original to the building should be repaired rather than replaced, only where necessary due to deterioration. In considering exterior changes, the Commission will weigh the needs and desires of the applicant with the overall good of the Historic District. While each application will be considered on its merits, the Commission will utilize the following guidelines in order to best implement its preservation responsibilities: 1) The more historically significant the structure, the more concerned the Commission will be that the structure's exterior appearance will retain its historic integrity and characters; 2) The more architecturally significant the structure, the more concerned the North (Front) Fagade of structure at 507 E. Eighth Street. Commission will be that the structure's exterior retains its architectural compatibility; 3) The more visible the structure is from a public right -of -way, the greater the Commission's concern; 4) The closer the structure is to historically or architecturally significant structures; the more the Commission will be concerned; 5) Restoration of original material is the ideal method to be used in all projects; 6) Renovation using identical materials is the next preferred method of addressing exterior work to be performed; 7) Use of materials that were traditionally used within the Historic District when the structure was built is preferred; 8) Use of natural materials is normally preferred over the use of artificial or synthetic materials; 9) Architectural detailing and fenestration are often the most important characteristics of a structure. For these reasons, the use of artificial siding on structures within the Historic District is discouraged. However, each application that includes the use of artificial or synthetic siding will be carefully considered by the Commission and particular attention will be paid to any special circumstances that may make use of artificial or synthetic siding prudent or necessary. Likewise, the application will be carefully scrutinized by the Commission in terms of the effects of the 5 proposed materials on the structure's style, historical integrity, structural and architectural integrity and the effect of the artificial or synthetic materials on the Historic District as a whole. WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND GUIDELINES: The following statements are in reference to the nine items above. Statement number three - The west and north facades are more visible or have potential to be more visible from the public right -of -way. Utmost care should be taken on these facades to restore the wood siding to the original state of the home. Statement number four - This structure is roughly centered between the MacArthur Park grounds, St Edwards Church, the Kramer School and the Terry Mansion. The proximity of this structure with other notable structures makes it of concern to maintain or enhance the overall quality of the structures in the district. The applicant stated that the condition of the wood siding under the aluminum siding is unknown. He proposes to remove the aluminum siding from one or more sections at a time to assess the condition of the wood and restore /repair /replace . There are three scenarios to the restoration of the wood siding: Scenario A: Remove the aluminum siding and the existing historic siding is in great condition, needing only caulking and painting. Scenario B: Remove the aluminum siding and the existing historic siding is in good condition, needing some replacement pieces of siding and caulking and painting. Scenario C: Remove the aluminum siding and the existing historic siding is such a condition that would require replacement of all of the siding with new wood siding that would be compatible with the style and character of the house. The new siding should be as close as possible to the profile of the historic siding. Staff suggests that the applicant start on the south and east walls to assess the condition of the original siding. 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. Staff inspection of sections of wall after aluminum siding has been removed and original siding has been exposed to determine quality of original wood siding. 3. Submittal of wood siding to Staff, whether it is to match the original or if it is a replacement of all siding on the structure. 6 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ACTION: Aril 10, 2006 Commissioner Marshall Peters stated for the record that he was abstaining from the item and he removed himself to the other end of the table. He is the applicant. Staff Brian Minyard made a presentation of the item. Mr. Peters is unsure what is under the side and is unsure of what condition the wood is in. Mr. Minyard discussed the different scenarios as discussed in the staff report and presented the staff recommendation. There were no questions from the Commissioners. Mr. Peters stated that he believed that the wood on the garage is going to match the house. His question was if he could take wood from the back of the garage to use on the house if needed. Chair Carolyn Newbern commented that it was just a question as to how much would be needed. Mr. Peters wanted to note that if the wood was in too much damage, that the artificial siding would go right back up because he could not afford to do the whole house. Chair Newbern clarified that if he was headed towards Scenario C, that he would not continue. Mr. Peters is hopeful that it is repairable under the siding. Commissioner Wesley Walls asked about the condition of the trim around the windows and asked if it was still there. Mr. Peters stated that the trim on the header of the windows was missing on all of the windows. Trim is present on the sides of the windows. A motion was made to approve with staff recommendation by Commissioner Kay Tatum and was seconded by Commissioner Walls. Debra Weldon asked if it needed to be clarified if Scenario 3 was the route taken. There was a discussion and if the project is cancelled, they did not feel that the motion would need to be modified. The motion was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 noes, 1 abstention and 1 absent. Item VI: Other Matters Enforcement Issues: 1301 Cumberland: Debra Weldon stated that the purpose of the hearing was to allow the Reddigs to be heard concerning architectural changes that were made to the property at 1301 Cumberland. Since the commission is not making a decision to grant or deny a COA, this is not a proper forum for public comments and is not a quasi judicial public hearing. This is an information hearing and is an informal hearing. The commission may make a motion to withdraw the motion for enforcement during this hearing or can make a motion to postpone enforcement. Boyd Maher asked if the commission could discuss items it would like to see in a future application. Debra Weldon restated that the purpose was for the Reddigs to provide information to the Commission and that this is not a discussion of the merits of the case. Mr. Bill Reddig stated that they generated a lot of paperwork for this hearing and would like to revise the drawings and resubmit for a COA. Commissioner Wesley 8 Walls asked if they would reflect the current state. Mr. Reddig stated that it would reflect changes made by the city. Chair Carolyn Newbern noted that the letter of March 6th went beyond the scope of the HDC and asked if what they were going to submit would reflect such. Mr. Reddig stated yes. Chair Newbern asked about the timeline. Mr. Reddig discussed the turnaround of the Board of Adjustment. Chair Newbern then asked the question of which hearing came first, the HDC or the Board of Adjustment (BOA). A discussion followed. Mr. Reddig stated that they want to submit to the HDC next month and start the ball rolling of the BOA. Tony Bozynski stated that the Staff works with applicants at both committees at different times, and that he would confirm this with Staff. Brian Minyard asked if it was the intent of the applicant to come to the May 2006 hearing. Mr. Reddig stated yes. Mr. Minyard stated that he would need the paperwork "pretty immediately ". He explained that the deadline was the previous Friday, but could squeeze them into the schedule. Mr. Reddig stated that they would not be available for the June hearing. Commissioner Marshall Peters asked what the last date possible to receive submittals for a hearing was. Mr. Minyard stated that there was some flexibility in the filing deadlines. Chair Newbern asked what the minimum filing submittals was to be able to legal ad. Mr. Minyard stated that he needed the one page application that could be faxed. Some drawings will need to be filed with the application, but final drawings need to be filed a number of days before the hearing as stated in the instructions. Mr. Minyard stated that they could go to the May meeting if only small modifications needed to be made to the drawings by them. A discussion followed concerning missing drawings that were presented at the July 2004 hearing. Mr. Reddig continued discussing the minutes of the previous hearings. Chair Newbern stated that all of the commissioners would like to see this resolved, amicably and appropriately in relation to the existing guidelines. Commissioner Peters asked if there was a time line to postpone the enforcement actions. Debra Weldon suggested a motion to suspend enforcement since the Reddigs intent was to file a COA. Commissioner Walls made a motion to recommend to the City Attorney's office to suspend the enforcement proceedings in light of the Reddigs stated intention to submit a new application for a COA. The motion was seconded. Karen Miller asked what the difference in an amended COA was and a new COA. Debra Weldon stated that it was a good question. Karen Miller stated that she would rather amend the COA that they already have and not go though the mail out process. Debra Weldon stated that whether it was a new or amended COA, the public hearing process has to be followed. Mr. Reddig asked if that included notification of surrounding properties. Mr. Reddig stated that he did not 9 get a notice when 1305 Cumberland went through the COA process. Mr. Minyard stated that it was Angela Murray's application and that it is in the records in the file. Tony Bozynski stated the requirements of the mailing. Mrs. Miller asked to be informed if she was on that list. Chair Newbern clarified the requirements on the mailings. Commissioner Peters stated that it was the third time in front of the commission and he has never gotten total response on any of his mailings. Chair Newbern discussed the signs in the windows. Debra Weldon proposed that there be two items on the agenda, one amended COA and one new COA. Brian Minyard asked to clarify that comment and expanded on it. Tony Bozynski stated that it would be best to have one revised COA and have a list in the report of the new and amended items. The motion was changed to state, "to amend the COX. Commissioner Peters asked if the Reddigs brought the drawing in question from the July meeting. Mrs. Miller stated that it should be in the minutes. Brian Minyard said that they would file it with their application. The motion was approved with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. Chair Newbern made the statement to the applicants that they would provide all of the (missing) drawings with the application to be filed. The applicants agreed. Brian Minyard told the applicants that the application were on line and gave them his phone number. He reiterated that fact that final drawings were not due immediately and asked them to be explicit on the application for every item that they wished to cover. Caroline Apartments: Brian Minyard stated that John Jarrard was supposed to be present at the meeting but noted that he was not present. Staff will contact him concerning this item. 1000 McGowan. Brian Minyard spoke with one of the developers and he has asked for a final inspection. Staff is waiting for the enforcement officers to do that inspection and stated that they are running half -staff. Chair Carolyn Newbern asked her to look carefully at the entrances and the lights. Brian Minyard added that the comment for the commission is to look carefully at the utility boxes on new construction of this scale for landscaping requirements and screening. 501 E Seventh, 1419 Commerce and 420 E Ninth, it was noted by Chair Newbern that no changes have been made. Commissioner Marshall Peters asked if Staff could list the names of the owners on the enforcements list. Debra Weldon stated that it was public information. CLG grants Chair Carolyn Newbern forwarded a list to Staff and it was emailed to the commissioners. Her list included: Preservation Plan and hiring a facilitator for the 10 public meetings, revising the ordinance, (Tony Bozynski stated that would not require a grant), and sending commissioners to CAMP. Boyd Maher stated that it was the NPAC in Baltimore this year. Another funding item would have been mailings to real- estate professionals, homeowners, etc. Brian Minyard asked if this was the "Resource Guide ". It was discussed that the resource guide might be a CDC publication. A discussion about the "entering the district signs" was had including colors, text, etc. Other CLG options were surveys. It was decided by the commission to prioritize for training first, quarterly meetings for staff meetings, and thirdly the preservation plan. A discussion was held about a consultant to do the preservation plan. Commissioner Wesley Walls added that it was a good idea to do that. Tony Bozynski added that it would be more efficient to have a consultant do it. Commissioner Marshall Peters asked if there was grant money to move utilities underground to preserve street trees. Mr. Bozynski said that staff would look into that. Commissioner Peters also added he would like to restore the sandstone curbs. He also would like to add decorative lights to the district. A motion was made that the first priority of the CLG grants is to be training, second priority is the preservation plan and the last item would be misc. items to include professional memberships. Commissioner Peters moved, and Commissioner Walls seconded and the motion was approved with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. Guidelines: Brian Minyard asked if the commission had seen Debra Weldon latest version. If the commission was satisfied with it, it could go to press. Tony Bozynski discussed the HDC going to the Board of Directors for the presentation of the guidelines. The tentative date is the first agenda meeting in May or June. There was discussion about the text of the number of historic districts in the city. It was decided to add the word "in addition to Mac Arthur Park" after the line "twelve other historic districts ". In the last part of legal authority before it goes into procedure, add AHPP back into text. Debra Weldon added that it would be nice to add federal state partnerships to reflect AHPP. Ms. Weldon is to email the final version to Staff. Grammatical errors were discussed and will be included in the email to staff. The flow chart on page nine was mentioned by Ms. Weldon. She felt that the flow chart made it appear that it was mandatory to go to court. Text is to be edited to say right to appeal instead of appeal. Change the text in the chart from "execute" COA to "implement ". Staff is to add a map for overlapping of CZDC and HDC. A small graphic should be added in the introduction. The last sentence is to be struck to reference appendix C. 11 Chair Newbern asked to redo the title page. Boyd Maher invited the commissioners to the April 27th of the CLG quarterly meeting. He also invited the commissioners to the Preservation Crustaceans fundraiser that evening. A motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Peters and seconded by Commissioner Walls. The meeting was adjourned at 7:01. p.m. Attest: Chair Date 12