HDC_01 03 2002City of Little Rock
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
3 JANUARY 2002
MINUTES
of the
LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
Commissioners Present: Howard H. Gordon Jean Ann Phillips Wyatt Weems
Commissioners Absent: John Greer Carolyn Newbern
Staff Present: V. Anne Guthrie Debra Weldon
The meeting of the Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC) was called to order and
there was a quorum. Minutes from the previous meeting (October 200 1) were approved as
presented; there was a training session in November and no December meeting due to the lack of
a quorum.
The first Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) was:
Applicant: Jay Core
Address: 316 E. 11th Street
Request: Construction of a rear addition
The applicant presented the proposed addition as approximately 130 square feet to be constructed
on the rear of the main structure. The main structure is ca. 1890, one -story brick contributing
structure, which the applicant has used for his business for several years. The structure is located
adjacent to a north -south alley, which is on his property's western side. The applicant owns the
abutting properties and the three structures to the east and north. A privacy fence is along the
property's perimeter on all four sides. The proposed rear addition is intended to replace a lean-to
that was part of the property prior to when he bought it; this new addition is smaller than the
original. The proposed addition was designed by John Jarrard, AIA, and based on an existing
outbuilding (10 10 Rock) in the same block; the architect has drawn several outbuildings in the
district. The exterior is board and batten, with a gabled roof.
There were no neighbors who called or were present to talk about the plans; adjoining owners
were notified but the applicant failed to bring the receipts to the meeting. Weldon stated that staff
must receive documentation of meeting notification to property owners.
Little Rock Historic District Commission
Minutes of 3 January 2002 meeting, Page 2
Weems made a motion to approve the application for 316 E. 11th Street as presented and
on condition that the required documentation of adjacent property owner notification is
submitted to staff. The vote was unanimous to approve the application conditionally.
Under new business, the meeting schedule for 2002 with specific deadlines was approved.
Gordon asked about the noncompliance of 1000 Rock and its status with both the LRHDC and
the city's Board of Directors (BOD). It was discussed whether a BOD decision will be made
upon the subsequent review of the district's design guidelines. Staff reported that the CLG grant
to hire a consultant to review the district's guidelines was at the stage of a contract agreement
with Nore' Winter of Denver.
There was discussion that the noncompliance of 1000 Rock has nothing to do with the review of
the district's design guidelines. Gordon wanted the record to show that there is no connection
between the two.
It was asked whether anything could be done about 1000 Rock and its noncompliance. There
were questions as to why the BOD was involved and whether the BOD has the authority to make
the final decision about 1000 Rock's noncompliance. A summary of the events of 1000 Rock
was given. The involvement of the BOD started in April 2001, when LRHDC chair John Greer
was asked to go before BOD to explain the situation. Gordon stated that he wanted an
explanation as to how these cases are to be decided in the future.
The BOD became involved due to the next step of the case, which was for the city to file an
injunction against 1000 Rock, which requires BOD approval. The city attorney would file an
injunction on behalf of the LRHDC in the county chancery court. There was general discussion
as to whether the LRHDC can test its responsibility by requesting that the city attorney file an
injunction on behalf of the LRHDC due to continued noncompliance of 1000 Rock.
Phillips asked if the LRHDC could proceed with the injunction as outlined for the group by
Weldon. This situation has brought into focus the need for a process when a property is not in
compliance. A property owner either must comply with the COA or resubmit a request. There
was general discussion about the COA process, the noncompliance of properties and the legality
of an injunction. Weldon explained the injunction process, which is basically that an injunction
spells out the specifics of the case and the judge then makes a determination. If the owner does
not comply with the judges' order, then the owner is in contempt of court and faces a penalty. An
injunction does not find fault but determines how the compliance can be met. Weldon briefed
them about nol process, etc. and stated that it is the city legal department's role to support the city
and its commissions.
Little Rock Historic District Commission
Minutes of 3 January 2002 meeting, Page 3
There was additional discussion of the legal process, the authorization of the LRHDC and the
role of the BOD. Phillips stated that the guidelines should be applied equitably to all, not to just
some, and certainly not as the BOD seems fit. It is important to have the LRHDC, which needs
the full support of the Mayor and the BOD. It isn't fair to let the owner of 1000 Rock get around
by not following or abiding by the city ordinance and design guidelines, while other applicants,
who have followed the ordinance and its procedure, have been denied requests. Phillips stated
that 1000 Rock has not been held accountable for not following the guidelines and the
ordinance. The issue should be resolved as it has gone beyond any reasonable time.
The group was reminded that the state's supreme court supported the responsibility and authority
of the LRHDC in its 1987 decision. It was a finding on which subsequent decisions were made
and how it upheld design guidelines, and more importantly, the authority of the historic district
commission. The decision to review the district's guidelines is related directly to the events of
1000 Rock; but if its owner were to come before the LRHDC or the BOD, then the old guidelines
would be used.
There was a concern that too much time has passed and that any decision about 1000 Rock
should not be based on the review of the design guidelines or its subsequent recommendations.
The owner of 1000 Rock needs to comply with the district guidelines in regard to the illegal
installation of vinyl windows on the front facade.
It was decided that a letter from LRHDC to the city manager and mayor (copying the BOD)
should be written to let them know that the review of the design guidelines is not connected to
the noncompliance of 1000 Rock. The letter would be the initial step of letting the BOD know of
the LRHDC's desire to address the noncompliance of 1000 Rock. A second step would be
whether the city attorney could file an injunction on behalf of the LRHDC. Weems made a
motion to draft such a letter about the noncompliance of 1000 Rock and how long it has taken for
the issue to be resolved. The noncompliance should not be based on review of the design
guidelines and should not deter a decision. There was additional discussion of Nore Winter's
upcoming contract to review the district's guidelines and what his work would entail in terms of
changes, recommendations, etc.
Boyd Maher, CLG coordinator with the AHPP, introduced himself and stated that there would be
a meeting of the state's historic district commissions. It will be held in Little Rock in February.
There was a motion to adjourn the meeting; the vote was unanimous.
(NOTE: The taping of this meeting, a majority of side A and' /4 of side B, relates to the
discussion of 1000 Rock and its noncompliance.)