Loading...
HDC_12 08 2005DEPARTMENT 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 Thursday December 8, 2005, 5:00 p.m. Sister Cities' Conference Room, City Hall I. Roll Call A Quorum was present being three (3) in number. Members Present: Carolyn Newbern Marshall Peters Wesley Walls Members Absent: Job Serebrov Kay Tatum City Attorney: Deborah Weldon Staff Present: Brian Minyard II. Approval of Minutes a. September 1, 2005 Commissioner Marshall Peters made a motion for approval of the minutes as submitted, Commissioner Wesley Walls seconded. The Minutes were approved 3 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. b. November 11, 2005 Commissioner Marshall Peters made a motion for approval of the minutes as submitted, Commissioner Wesley Walls seconded. The Minutes were approved 3 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. 1 III. Finding of Compliance with Notice Requirements of all Subjects The notices were found to be sufficient on all the items. IV. Deferred Certificates of Appropriateness: a. None V. New Certificates of Appropriateness: 2 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. One. DATE: December 8, 2005 APPLICANT: Charles Witsell, Jr. WER Architects ADDRESS: 815 Sherman Street, Little Rock, AR 72202 COA Demolition of rectory building and construction of building for REQUEST: classrooms, offices, labs, etc. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 815' Sherman Street. The property's legal description is "South 300 feet of the east 290 feet of Block 3 of Johnson's supplemental addition, AKA Johnson's Addition to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas." The church property includes this entire block. The rectory building was built in the mid 1950's and replaced a building that was a Victorian /Colonial Revival structure that had originally served as the rectory. The current yellow brick rectory is a mid 20th century Eclectic. It is not considered a "Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic District The architectural significance in the 1978 survey is of a Priority III (I being the highest and II being the Location of Project lowest) and Historical Significance of Local significance. Local historical significance means that the buildings are associated with people of social prominence. The administration building to the north is located at 801 Sherman. The administration building to the north is labeled as such on the drawings, but may be referred to as the 3 Convent. It has not been used as a convent for some time. It dates to c1930 and is a mid 20th century Eclectic building. The architectural significance in the 1978 survey is of Priority III and Historical Significance of Local significance. It is a contributing structure in the 1988 Survey. It is noted that it has a Romanesque Revival Porch. The St Edwards Church located at 823 Sherman is a c1901 Gothic Revival building designed by Charles Thompson with major architectural significance and Detailed location map with buildings labeled local historical significance. It is a contributing structure in the 1988 Survey. This entire block was the subject of a Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P) that was heard at the Planning Commission on December 1, 2005. That C.U.P. was necessary because of multiple buildings on one parcel of property. The loss of parking spaces was reviewed at that hearing. The removal of parking spaces does not require a review of the HDC. The footprint of the proposed building is larger than the old rectory and parking was removed because of that fact. The existing yellow brick rectory of 5700 square feet (one story with basement) will be demolished and replaced with a 16,200 square feet building that will be two stories with a full finished basement. (The current building's basement has a low ceiling height.) The building will contain a library with support space, a science lab with support space, a computer lab, four general classrooms, two offices and teacher workrooms, a conference room and the support services of toilets, stairs, elevators, etc. Existing Rectory at 815 Sherman There will be a loss of parking spaces that has been reviewed in the C.U.P process. ANALYSIS: The New Construction Design Guidelines states eleven items relevant to this case: 4 Primary buildings should maintain, not disrupt, the existing pattern of surrounding historic buildings along the street by being similar in: 1. Shape 2. Scale (height and width) I Roof shape and pitch 4. Orientation to the street 5. Location and proportion of entrances, windows, porches and divisional bays 6. Foundation height 7. Floor to ceiling height 8. Porch height and depth 9. Material and material color (if brick— closely matching mortar and brick color tones, if frames — matching lap dimension with wood or smooth masonite, not vinyl or aluminum siding) 10. Texture (details such as trim around windows, doors, eaves, watercourses, corner boards, eave depths, etc.) Should be similar in size: and 11. Placement on the lot (front and side yard setbacks.) Note: A new building becomes too imitative through application of historic architectural decoration such as gingerbread, vergeboards, dentils, fish scale shingles, etc. These kinds of details are rarely successful on a new building. They fail to be accurate (are usually smaller, skimpy, disproportionate versions of authentic ones) and should be avoided. The setback of the proposed building is at the property line that is similar to the front of the church (not the steps, but the fagade of the building). The proposed building is to be attached to the classroom building to the east with a breezeway. There will be proposed entry sidewalk perpendicular to the street from the front door of the building. The west elevation of the proposed building is compatible with the administration building in height. The pitch on the gable facing Sherman Street is a 10/12 with a flat roof section to the south. The second story windows on the north side of the building are similar to the openings on the second floor porch of the administration building. The brickwork above the proposed windows is similar to the existing brickwork on the second floor porch. The brick soldier courses separating the floors are similar to the administration building yet also evoking the limestone banding on the church. 5 BTT, STUD 12 WEST (SHERMAN SC+ILIE; W a 1'aW PAINTED - WOOD BRACKETS NORTH ELEVATION WOOD GABLE VENT W/ PRECABTCONG SILL BRICK CORBELLING SIMILAR TO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ALUM. WINDOWS, THERMALLY INSULATED WITH LOW -E GLAZING TO APPEARTO BE HUNG TYPE WINDOW5 BUT INOPERADLE. SIZES OF WINDOWS 91MI W R YO EKI6TIN0 WINDOWS IN ADJACENT ADMINI5TRATION BUILDING PREFINIOHED ALUM. PARAPET CAP FLASHING OVER PRECA5TCONC. VENEER OIWX OOKaCLLING 9JMILAR TO APM9115TRAWN BUILDING LAMMCATW OV'Off EIL (MCJ BRICK WILDER COURSING TO MATCH ADJACENT APMIN15TRATION BUILDING PREFINISHED ALUM, 5CUPPERS AND DOWNSPOUTS •0NE -0TORY iTRW TUBE AT SCIENCE LAS BEYOND u4xa9OABLEVW W PRECASTCONC, SILL PREFINISHED ALUM, PARAPETCAP FLASHING OVER PRECAST CONC VENE CANOPY WITH - SUPPORTS TOANCHOR PRECAST CONC, PANEL ABOVE 6 BENEATH TO 51RUCIURE OF BUILDING TRIPLE WE DOUBLE -HUNG WINDOW UNITS AT FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS The panels between the first and second floor windows are to be precast panels. This is a new element that is indicative of newer architectural styles of the last quarter of the 20th century. The pattern of the windows is compatible with the administration building. The proposed windows are nine over nine windows that duplicates the muntins on the administration building. The majority of the windows are placed singly with the same pattern of positive and negative space. The north and west elevation of the proposed building has two sets of three ganged windows under both gable ends. The western facing windows do have brick between the individual windows while the north elevation windows do not. The administration building does not have any ganged windows. The design intent as stated R 40 YR- ARCHITECTURAL GRADE ASPHALT LAMINATED SHINGLES -- EXISTING CLASSROOM BUILDING JEW LINK TO L"U3TING CLASSROOM BUILDING BEYOND. QNNOPT PAINTED - WOOD BRACKETS NORTH ELEVATION WOOD GABLE VENT W/ PRECABTCONG SILL BRICK CORBELLING SIMILAR TO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ALUM. WINDOWS, THERMALLY INSULATED WITH LOW -E GLAZING TO APPEARTO BE HUNG TYPE WINDOW5 BUT INOPERADLE. SIZES OF WINDOWS 91MI W R YO EKI6TIN0 WINDOWS IN ADJACENT ADMINI5TRATION BUILDING PREFINIOHED ALUM. PARAPET CAP FLASHING OVER PRECA5TCONC. VENEER OIWX OOKaCLLING 9JMILAR TO APM9115TRAWN BUILDING LAMMCATW OV'Off EIL (MCJ BRICK WILDER COURSING TO MATCH ADJACENT APMIN15TRATION BUILDING PREFINISHED ALUM, 5CUPPERS AND DOWNSPOUTS •0NE -0TORY iTRW TUBE AT SCIENCE LAS BEYOND u4xa9OABLEVW W PRECASTCONC, SILL PREFINISHED ALUM, PARAPETCAP FLASHING OVER PRECAST CONC VENE CANOPY WITH - SUPPORTS TOANCHOR PRECAST CONC, PANEL ABOVE 6 BENEATH TO 51RUCIURE OF BUILDING TRIPLE WE DOUBLE -HUNG WINDOW UNITS AT FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS The panels between the first and second floor windows are to be precast panels. This is a new element that is indicative of newer architectural styles of the last quarter of the 20th century. The pattern of the windows is compatible with the administration building. The proposed windows are nine over nine windows that duplicates the muntins on the administration building. The majority of the windows are placed singly with the same pattern of positive and negative space. The north and west elevation of the proposed building has two sets of three ganged windows under both gable ends. The western facing windows do have brick between the individual windows while the north elevation windows do not. The administration building does not have any ganged windows. The design intent as stated 6 by the architect was to make the windows appear similar to the administration buildings windows. The windows will be single hung to appear to be double hung. There will be simulated divided lights (fixed interior and exterior muntins with an internal spacer bar.) The aluminum clad wood windows were specified on the submittal, but budget may dictate alternative windows. aLEVATION DUILDINGBEYOND. SCALE: 110 ". T•0" Administration north facade Administration south facade The proposed building will be brick with details of precast concrete. The building is planned to be compatible with the office building to the north in scale. It is labeled as "Administration" on the 11x17 handouts. The brick will be compatible in color to church building to the south with the solider course banding to match the administration building to the north. This soldier course will be a continuous band located t the top of the windows on both the first and second floors. The precast concrete will have a limestone appearance. The precast sills and trim on the building reflect both the administration and church building. 7 4 / bk;ALt: 1/0" = V -P' SUILOINO- NEW COMBTRUGTION �•J TO TSFMINATE AT THI5 POINT Shingle color on the roof will be of a light gray color and be similar to the administration building. The gutters will be sheet metal and be painted to match the windows. The schematic roof plan shows two dormers on the south side of the roof and are part of the HVAC system for ductwork penetration into the roof. They are intended to be hidden from view from the street. Wood brackets hold up the porches on the western main entry, on both sides of the entry at the breezeway and on the south entry. The wood brackets are simple in design and are more characteristic of Craftsman design. Even though paint color on wood is not something that is covered in the design guidelines, the proposed off -white color will make the brackets a contrasting color to the brick and they will be a prominent feature on the building. The cross on top of the church will be of painted sheet metal and will generally look like simple stone. The sheet metal will be prefinished. The attic vents duplicate the existing vent on the administration building in shape and size. There is a precast sill under the vent. The vent will be painted similar to the vent on the administration building. Even though paint color is not something that is covered in the design guidelines, the proposed, off -white color will make the attic vent a contrasting color to the brick; it will be prominent as the vent on the administration building. 8 WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND GUIDELINES: Primary buildings should maintain, not disrupt, the existing pattern of surrounding historic buildings along the street by being similar in: 1. Shape: The shape of the structure is compatible with the surrounding buildings. 2. Scale (height and width): The height of the proposed building is between the heights of the administration and church buildings. 3. Roof shape and pitch: The proposed building will have a 10/12 roof that is similar to the administration and church building. All three buildings have a gable end facing Sherman Street, although the proposed building has a significant portion being a flat roof. 4. Orientation to the street: The entrance to the structure is facing Sherman Street as is the church and the administration building's entrances. 5. Location and proportion of entrances, windows, porches and divisional bays: 6. Foundation height: The new building will not have a raised foundation. This is not compatible with the two other buildings. This proposed building will physically connect with the building to the east and the floor height is largely determined by the floor height of that building. 7. Floor to ceiling height: The height is more similar to the administration building than to the sanctuary for the church. 8. Porch height and depth: There is a small overhang above the doors facing Sherman Street of approximately two feet. The relationship with the building to the east precludes a raised porch to be similar to the other two buildings. 9. Material and material color (if brick — closely matching mortar and brick color tones, if frames — matching lap dimension with wood or smooth masonite, not vinyl or aluminum siding): The brick will closely match the church and the administration building. The precast will closely match the color and texture of the existing stone on the church. 10. Texture (details such as trim around windows, doors, eaves, watercourses, corner boards, eave depths, etc.) should be similar in size: the soldier course above the windows is similar to the administration buildings. 11. Placement on the lot (front and side yard setbacks): The setback of the proposed building is at the property line that is similar to the front of the church (not the steps, but the fagade of the building). Note: A new building becomes too imitative through application of historic architectural decoration such as gingerbread, vergeboards, denails, fish scale shingles, etc. These kinds of details are rarely successful on a new building. They fail to be accurate (are usually smaller, skimpy, disproportionate versions of authentic ones) and should be avoided. Staff does not feel that this statement applies to this application. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no comments regarding this application. 9 NEW LIBRARY AND CLASSROOM BUILDING, ST. EDWARDS CHURCH AND SCHOOL Summary of Project and use of proposed spaces. This proposed project will demolish the existing 5700 square foot yellow brick rectory and replace it with a 16,200 square fb0t building that that will be two stories plus a finished basement. The building will contain one library vvitb support space, one science labwith support space, one computer lab, four general classrooms, two offices and teacher workrooms, a conference room and toilets, lockers, stairs, elevator, and related smaller components. Demolition: The existing rectory building is used as priest's residence and a variety of small meeting rooms used primarily by the school. It is a one story building with a partially exposed basement with low ceiling height. With the removal of this building the existing basement area will be come part of the volume of the new construction. Design Intent for the New Building: The proposed building will be brick with details of pre-cast concrete. In color and detail the new building is intended to be very compatible with the office building at the north end of the block. The yellow brick of the rectory building is not compatible with the dark gray brick of the monumental church or the middle gray of the office building (sometimes called the convent building.) It has not been used as a convent in many years, It is the intention of this congregation, building cornmittee, rector and architects that the appearance of the new building be harmonious with the office building in scale and massing, and that brick that comes reasonably close matching the office building be used, Pre-cast concrete (limestone appearance) sills and trim on the building will reflect the older building as well. Windows that are similar will be used. Composition shingles will be used for the roof, which will approximate the office buildiog as well. Site Changes Tbe site will have few changes, although there will be a small loss parking spaces since the new footprint of the building will exceed the older one to be demolished. A new ground mounted sign will be placced near the south-west corner of the church building. It is atso intended to be compatible. Cover letter from applicant 10 Photos of buildings along Sherman Street: 521 East Eight 801 Sherman Administration Building Across Sherman Street Connection to Classrooms Fire Station across street St. Edwards Church View south down Sherman Street STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions 1. Obtaining a building permit. 2. Submittal of final window design to Staff. If windows are significantly different than those approved by the commission, a separate hearing may be required to approve the windows. 3. Replace precast panels between windows with brick either of the same bond as used on the body of the building or a decorative bond to accent the areas. 4. The granite curbs along Sherman shall be protected during construction. Any replacement curbing (to remove driveway aprons) shall conform to Public Works comments, but shall not include removal of granite curbing. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ACTION: December 8, 2005 Brian Minyard, of city Staff, made a short presentation concerning the item. Charles Witsell, representing the church, introduced the other parties at the hearing: Scott Landers, Ed Sergeant, and Arron Ruby. Mr. Witsell gave an overview of the building and their use. The purpose of the addition to the school is to enrich the school with new library facilities, labs, classrooms, etc. not to increase attendance. The new building will match brick and roof to the administration building to the north. Revised drawings are submitted to remove the precast panels between the first and second floor windows. The new drawings show a basket -weave pattern of brick on those places. Precast accents had been removed from a lot of the building prior to submittal to the HDC, but it still remains in windowsills and coping. Commissioner Wesley Walls asked about the bond of the brick. Mr. Witsell answered that the basic bond was a running bond with the Basket weave bond being the accent. 12 Mr. Ruby presented some building materials to the commission. The Roof will be an "Olde English Pewter color" from the Heritage Series of asphalt shingles. The brick is from Acme Brick and will match the color of the brick but will not include the iron spots that are included in the brick on the existing building. Mr. Witsell added that the soldier courses (horizontal bands) on the new building would reflect the soldier courses on the administration building. Mr. Ruby continued that the windows will have the precast concrete sills and the windows will appear to be double hung, when in fact they are single hung. They will be aluminum clad wood windows with possibly a white finish on the exterior. The brand name that is being explored is "Vetter" and has a simulated divided light with fixed exterior and interior muntins with spacers between the glass. He continued that in reference to the Staff recommendations, the church was okay with items one and two, was verbally amending their submission 'on number three to include the brick basket weave pattern and was okay with number four of the conditions. Commissioner Carolyn Newbern asked about the brickwork over the arches over the top of the west windows. Mr. Witsell answered that it was fancier brickwork to mimic the administration building brickwork. Commissioner Walls stated that it was a beautiful building and Commissioner Marshall Peters seconded. Scott Landers thanks the architects and commented that he thought the building fit well in the neighborhood. Commissioner Peters asked about the placement of the dumpster. Mr. Witsell stated that it would stay where it was. (Staff comment — The location of the dumpster is outside the purview of this application.) Ed Sergeant commented that Public Works has a stockpile of the granite curbs that can be had for replacing. Mr. Minyard said that he would look into that. Boyd Maher, of AHPP, stated that the state office was in consensus as to the demolition of a 55- year -old building that is intact. He read from the guidelines. He stated that in the 1988 survey did not note this as a contributing structure since it was not 50 years old at the time, however, if the MacArthur Park resurvey was complete, it be a contributing structure. He continued on the topic of setting a precedent of demolitions in the district. Debra Weldon, from the City Attorney's office, stated that the commission does not set precedent. Commissioner Newbern stated that it would be speculation if the structure would be contributing or not. Mr. Maher added that St. Edward is great for downtown and was an asset to the district. Commissioner Peters made a motion to approve as presented and amended with staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Walls and was approved 3 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. 13 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. Two. DATE: December 8, 2005 APPLICANT: Ed Sergeant, Polk Stanley ADDRESS: 823 Sherman Street, Little Rock, AR 72202 COA Replace existing sign. REQUEST: PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 815 Sherman Street. The property's legal description is "South 300 feet of the east 290 feet of Block 3 of Johnson's supplemental addition, AKA Johnson's Addition to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas." The church property includes this entire block. The main church building is a Gothic Revival ca. 1901. It is considered a "Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic District. The architectural significance of the main church structure is a Priority I from the 1978 survey that includes the structures that contribute most to the district. The historical significance of the structure is of the "Local Significance" designation. ANALYSIS: The Sign Design Guidelines states seven items relevant to this case: Location of Project C. Signs should be kept to a minimum, one per house or two per commercial-used building D. Signs that are freestanding may be used where necessary but should be low and small and constructed of wood or a non-shiny finish 14 H. Signs should not be illuminated with visible bulbs or luminous paints, but with remote sources. I. Signs should be of traditional materials such as finished wood, glass, copper, or bronze; not plywood, plastic, or unfinished wood J. Signs should be of a size proportionate to the building, not oversize. L. Signs should have no more than three colors and use colors that coordinate with the building colors. M. Signs should have traditional letters in such as serif, sans serif, or script and letters that do not exceed 18 inches in height or cover more than 60 percent of the total sign area. 15 15' 5E VACJ REWIREO Y CITY "!2L• Grl TiON � 1% AaE CEMrEPj.IW SIGN = GEt rt !kE P&ASTER u i NEW N SIGN 0 - -- i� 6ROMD Nowr&7 LI Irr BOTP 54 EMS nm 0 DCCZA.ATI y LIGHT 9 NORTH .5HF-RMAN STREET SITE PLAN 3065" = I `-O" DATE, OCTOBER 512005 &ENERAL NOTE5: SAINT EDWARO CHWCH 801 SOUTH SHERMAN ST. 1. U1MEN5ION5 SHOWN ARE NOMINAL VI. Sign location 15 16 4' -b" FACE OF BRICK I" GAP OVERHANG 3 -4" g" 6" TOP OF GAP SHALL MATCH GAP AT 5TAIR `fl PREGA5 r CONCRETE GAP 4 ° TO MATCH CHURCH Ury B OWE DEDICATION _ p SAnqT Emimp BRICK TO MATCH CHURCH PLAOU * 11' CHURCH AND SCHOOL gRpNgE LF_TIERS Q 2 IIt7$ 3 101ESIA SAM EDUARDO PRECAST CONCRETE i' �•I STONE BASE TO MATCH CHURCH Qu.� h � I _ I I FOOTING BEYQND I 1 L------------------------ J Sign elevation FACE BRICK 1" GAP OVERHANG PRECAST FINIAL PRECAST CONCRETE_ GAP - TO MATCH CHURCH PRECAST CONCRETE TQ MATCW GHURGN GAP — fl 55 DCAELS AT 16" BOND BEAM SNITH CONT. d3 FILL IMTH &ROUT BRICK TO MATCH GHU,RCH ' +j BR16K TO MATCH CHURCH BRONZE DEITIGATION I� D CONT. DRIP PLAQUE * n 2" BRONZE LETTERS P)WC- A5T CONCRETE PRECAST CONCRETE — —� MEMBRANE FLA5HIN6 WITH n1 U c P1EEP5 A716" O.G, STONE BASE TO STONE BASE TO MATCH MATCH CHURCH / CHURCH 6" CMU WITH 414 00h1EL5 - I _ _ _ _ - r _ I _ _ , AT 15'; FILL REINF GELL5 FOOT/Nv BEYdNR - -�I I hITH OROUT I I � CONCRETE FOOTIN& AN1TH 4A4 AT 161 BOTH h1AY5 MIN. 2" CONC. COVERAGE OF REINF, 6 1/ffi� b• B' -O" Sign Section 16 WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND GUIDELINES: The sign would identify the church and school from the most prominent corner of the property at the southwest corner of the block at Ninth and Sherman Streets. The design of the sign is similar to the church architecture. The brick sign sits on a stone base and has a stone cap that will be precast. On the broad side of the sign (east and west sides) is an inset precast concrete panel that will have bronze letters attached individually. The text on the sign that includes the following text "Saint Edward / Church and School / Iglesia San Eduardo" with a cross. The Spanish text reflects the large number of Latino members of the church. The application states "Materials will be as close of a match possible depending upon what is available on the market." The brick will be as close a match as possible to the church building and the precast cap and base will match the existing stone of the church in color and texture. On the north face of the sign is a small dedication plaque in bronze. This plaque would not be visible from the street. The sign is in compliance with the City of Little Rock setback requirements for signage and for vehicular visibility at street corners. C. Signs should be kept to a minimum, one per house or two per commercial-used building: This would be the primary sign for the church. There is a sign for the School that is located to the east that is mounted on the wall. D. Signs that at freestanding may be used where necessary but should be low and small and constructed of wood or a non -shiny finish: This sign is out of materials that match the material of the church. Overall dimensions will be around 48" tall, is 4' — 8" wide and 16" thick. H. Signs should not be illuminated with visible bulbs or luminous paints, but with remote sources: There will be two ground- mounted lights to illuminate the sign. The fixtures should be small and unobtrusive. The wattage on the bulbs should be of such wattage to illuminate the sign but no wash out all of the color of the signage. The fixtures should be aimed directly at the sign with minimum over-wash. The finish of the exterior of the fixtures should not be shiny and should be of an unobtrusive color. I. Signs should be of traditional materials such as finished wood, glass, copper, or bronze; not plywood, plastic, or unfinished wood: This sign is out of materials that match the materials of the church: brick precast masonry, and bronze letters. J. Signs should be of a size proportionate to the building, not oversize: Staff feels that this sign is of an appropriate size for the structure and location. L. Signs should have no more than three colors and use colors that coordinate with the building colors: The sign will have three colors: brick, precast and bronze. 17 M. Signs should have traditional letters in such as serif, sans serif, or script and letters that do not exceed 98 inches in height or cover more than 60 percent of the total sign area: The letters on the sign are less than 6" in height, and do not exceed 60% of the sign face. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no comments regarding this application. Existing sign Existing coping on church steps St Edwards Church STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Obtaining a building permit (may be included in the general permit for the classroom building). 2. Obtain a sign permit. (There is no fee associated with a church sign.) 18 3. The lighting fixtures will be approved by staff prior to installation. Actual samples or spec sheets with manufacturer, model number and finish will be provided prior to approval. See additional comments above. 4. Sign off (in writing) by Public Works for visibility triangle for placement of sign. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ACTION: December 8, 2005 Brian Minyard, of city Staff, made a short presentation concerning the item. Ed Sergeant, a member of the church's building committee, made a presentation about the sign. He stated that a donation had been made to construct the sign. He stated the sign was compatible with the main sanctuary, the building it was most close to. The brick matches the brick of the sanctuary and the precast matches the limestone coping that is on the church. He continued that Public Works had okayed the location of the sign for visibility at the corner. He noted that the church does have Spanish masses and so a portion of the sign is in Spanish. Lighting is to be tasteful and small scale. Commissioner Marshal Peters asked about the lighting. Mr. Sergeant stated that it would be directional, light only the sign and would be ground mounted. Commissioner Wesley Walls stated that with cutoffs and wattage controls, light pollution could be avoided. Boyd Maher, of AHPP, did not have any comments on the sign. Commissioner Walls made a motion to approve as presented with staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Peters and was approved 3 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. 19 VII. Other Matters Charles Witsell noted that construction had begun at his project at 1101 Scott and invited the commission to go by and take a look. Topics for the retreat scheduled for January included guidelines, preservation plan, appropriate demolitions and review of the ordinance. Commissioner Newbern asked about an annual report. Mr. Minyard commented that it could be incorporated into the department wide annual report. The meeting was adjourned at 6:14. Attest: Chair Date 20