HDC_07 06 2023July 6, 2023
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
LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
AGENDA
Thursday, July 6th, 2023, 4:00 p.m.
Willie Hinton Neighborhood Resource Center, 3805 W. 12th Street
I. Roll Call
Members Present: Chair, Amber Jones
Vice Chair, Christina Aleman
Tom Fennell
Amber Haugen
Scott Green
Thomas DeGraff
Members Absent: Jonathan Nunn
Staff Present: Hannah Ratzlaff
Jeremy Gosdin
Brad Jordan
Sherri Latimer
Citizens Present: Andrea Andrews
Joseph Flaherty
II. Finding a Quorum
Quorum was present being six (6) in number.
III. Minutes
1. June 1, 2023 Minutes
The minutes were presented. Commissioner Aleman made a motion to
accept the minutes. Commissioner Jones seconded. The minutes were
approved by voice vote.
IV. National Register Nominations
1. NR2023-004 Georgetown Apartments
18 Nottingham Road
July 6, 2023
2
V. Deferred Certificates of Appropriateness
None
VI. New Certificates of Appropriateness
1. HDC2023-018 Andrea Andrews
Southern Magnolia House LLC
1301 Cumberland
Signage
VII. Other Matters
1. Letter of Support – URC NPS Grant – Dunbar Junior & Senior High and
Junior College
2. Enforcement Issues
3. Certificates of Compliance
HDC2023-019 – 803 Rock Street – reroof and roof repairs
HDC2023-020 – 1405 Cumberland - window air conditioning unit removal
and mini split installation
HDC2023-021 – 803 Rock Street – siding repair
4. Citizen Communication
VIII. Adjournment
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
NAME: Georgetown Apartments Historic District
LOCATION: 18 Nottingham Rd
OWNER/AUTHORIZED AGENT:
Glen Ferguson Megan Willmes
Georgetown Apartments Arkansas Historic Preservation Program
18 Nottingham Rd 1101 North Street,
Little Rock, AR Little Rock, AR
Figure 1. Georgetown Apartments, 18 Nottingham Rd, taken from Georgetown Apartment Homes website, Ferguson Property
Group.
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
4
AREA: 6.09 acres NUMBER OF LOTS : 2 WARD: 3
HISTORIC DISTRICT: Nominated as “Georgetown Apartments”
HISTORIC STATUS: DOE submitted, determined Eligible (May 2023)
CURRENT ZONING: R5 – Urban Residence
A. BACKGROUND
Location
The subject property is located at 18 Nottingham Road. The property’s verbal
boundary description is:
Two parcels situated at the southwest corner of S. McKinley St. and W. 3 rd St.,
bounded by McKinley on the east, W. 3rd on the north, on the south by a line
running west from Midtown Ave., and on the east by Summerhill Apartments and
LISA Academy.
Figure 2. Georgetown Apartments location in relation to Little Rock National Register Historic Districts.
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
5
Context
In 1962, a rezoning permit (Z-00526) was
approved and issued to Peter H. Edward
by the Little Rock Planning Commission to
rezone the lot abutting S. McKinley from
single-family to multi-family. The project
was approved with development plans and
illustrations, on September 13, 1962.
In 1968, a rezoning application (Z-02180), titled Georgetown Addition, was
submitted to the Planning Commission by Lewis S Rauton “and others” to rezone
the lot abutting W. 3rd Street from single-family to multi-family. The case was
approved at the Planning Commission level on May 2, 1968, and then was
petitioned by the surrounding properties owners concerning proper public
notification and went to the Board of Directors on May 20, 1968. It was ultimately
approved by ordinance (Ord. 12,073).
Figure 3.Boundaries of
proposed Georgetown
Apartments Historic
District shown in dashed
lines.
Figure 4. Site Plan 2 of Little Rock Planning Commission zoning case Z -00526, 1962.
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
6
B. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The application requests to nominate the Georgetown Apartments at 18
Nottingham Road to the National Register of Historic Places for local significance
under Criterion C. Areas of significance are Community Planning and
Development. The period of significance is 1962-1970.
National Register Criterion C is identified as: Property embodies the distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work
of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and
distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction.
Local significance is identified as: importance of a property to the history of its
community, such as a town or county.
C. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
See photos in Nomination (Attachment A).
D. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
At the time of distribution, there were no comments regarding this application.
All neighborhood associations registered with the City of Little Rock that s urround
the site were notified of the public hearing.
Figure 5. Letterhead
section of letter from
Lewis S. Rauton to the
Planning Commission,
dated April 27, 1968.
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
7
E. ANALYSIS:
The Nomination states:
Summary Paragraph
“Georgetown Apartments is a garden apartment complex consisting of 140
townhouses-type, two-story apartments built in two phases beginning in 1960.
Located at 18 Nottingham Road three miles west of downtown Little Rock, the
Apartments consist of twenty-one countable resources located on six acres just off
McKinley Street. Across the street to the east is a shopping center and west, north,
and south of here area apartments and residential complexes. Six of the nineteen
buildings were constructed as part of an expansion project in 1970. They occupy
the northwest portion of the Apartments and are not connected to the original 1962
section. They are accessed separately by way of West 3rd Street.
The Apartments occupy an L-shaped site that features private paved drives and
parking lots, lawns accented with shrubs and shade trees, and fenced -in
backyards. The buildings are grouped together in rows of rectangular blocks as
part of a landscaped site fronting onto a U-shaped inner street. An octagonal
swimming pool is at the center of the complex. The nineteen buildings share many
of the same features, including gable or hip roofs, brick facades, and white-painted
wood trim with Georgian-style pediments above the doorways. The Apartments
had some of the roofs replaced with similar asphalt shingles to the originals in the
1990s and many of the windows have also been replaced.”
Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph:
“Georgetown Apartments is significant under Criterion C: Community Planning and
Development with local significance for its association with the development of low-
rise apartment blocks in west Little Rock in the 1960s and as one of the few works
of a nationally known developer of correctional facilities, Prindle & Patrick, in
Arkansas. It is distinguished from more typical apartments from this period by
virtue of its Georgian Revival-style brick with painted wood trim architectural
styling, a set of stylistic details that were replicated in Prindle 7 Patrick’s best -
known development in New Albany, Ohio. Georgetown Apartments is significant
as an economically successful prototype of a low-rise apartment complex that used
traditional forms to create a sense of place distinct from neighboring suburban
developments set far from the downtown. Georgetown Apartments is also
significant as an early example of architect Theodore Prindle’s work which forged
an important business and political affiliation that enabled his firm to achieve
distinction as designers of courthouses and jails for major American cities such as
Columbus, Lexington, and Cleveland, plus in smaller cities in Florida, Kentucky,
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
8
and Illinois. The period of significance begins with the initial design and
construction of the Georgetown Apartments in 1960 and ends in 1972 with the
successful completion of the complex’s second building phase.”
The Arkansas Historic Preservation Program has set forth the “Arkansas Certified Local
Government Procedures.” In Section V of this agreement, “Certified Local Governments
Participation in the National Register Nomination Process,” Little Rock Historic District
Commission’s role is identified:
“B. CLG involvement in the National Register process
1. Within 60 calendar days of receipt of the nomination, the CLG shall inform the
AHPP by submission of a report (see section V -A) as to its opinion regarding
the eligibility of the property. The CLG shall also inform the property owner(s)
using National Register criteria for evaluation, as to its opinion regarding the
eligibility of the property.
2. In the event a nomination is received by the AHPP before submission to the
CLG, the AHPP will forward a copy of the completed nomination to the CLG
within 30 calendar days of receipt.
3. If both the commission and chief elected official recommend that a property
not be nominated because it does not meet the National Register criteria for
eligibility, the CLG will so inform the property owner(s) and the State
Historic. Preservation Officer, the property will then not be nominated unless
an appeal is filed with the SHPO in accordance with appeal procedures
outlined in 36 CFR 60. Appeals must be received by the SHPO within 30
calendar days of the date the property owner receives notification by certified
mail that the property has been determined ineligible for nomination by both
the CLG and the Chief elected official. This is in accordance with Section
101[c) 2 of the NHPA.
4. If the commission or the chief elected official of the CLG recommend that a
property should be nominated, the nomination will be scheduled for
submission to the Arkansas State Review Board. Scheduling will be in
accordance with notification time constraints as set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.
5. The Arkansas State Review Board, after considering all opinions, including
those of the commission and the chief elected official of the CLG, shall make
its recommendation to the State Historic Preservation Officer. Either the local
preservation commission or the chief elected official may appeal the SHPOs
final decision.
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
9
6. When a National Register nomination, that has been reviewed by a
commission, is submitted to the National Park Service for review and listing,
all reports or comments from the local officials will be submitted along with the
nomination.
7. The AHPP and the CLG will work together to provide ample opportunity for
public participation in the nomination of properties to the National register. All
reports submitted by the CLG to the AHPP regarding the eligibility of
properties shall include assurances of public input. The CLG shall retain a list
of all persons contacted during the evaluation period and note comments that
were received. If a public meeting was held, a list of those attending shall be
included in the report.”
Staff finds several errors in the nomination to correct concerning date consistency
and corrections of relevant events asserted in the historic narrative section. For
example, the nomination states that the proximity of the Park Plaza shopping
center and Interstate 630 made the location attractive for developers; however, the
interstate was not completed in this section of town until post-1970. Further, the
nomination in sections confuses Park Plaza at 6000 W Markham and University
Mall (demolished 2008) across McKinley, which was not open until 1967. Staff
recommends the nomination consider more relevant events with documented
evidence when asserting why the site was attractive for development in t he early
1960s, such as the 1959 annexation.
In the 1950s, University Avenue was the far west city limit until 22.2 square miles
of land west of University Avenue was annexed in 1959 (Ord. 10,987), including
the Georgetown parcels. With this annexation, the unincorporated, predominantly
residential and rural area west of Little Rock was positioned to become the
suburban West Little Rock and Midtown areas we know today. Staff recommends
integration of Little Rock’s 1959 annexation and its influence on the Georgetown
development into the nomination narrative to further ground the development’s
history in Little Rock’s context and to further outline how the development was
influential for westward multi-family development in Little Rock.
Additionally, the nomination does not mention the petition by surro unding single-
family neighborhoods to deny the rezoning application for the 1962 development.
The Plaza Terrace neighborhood just north of the property wrote to the Planning
Commission that the proposed rezoning was “creeping commercialism”, and would
cause property devaluation, negative traffic impact, negative noise impact, and
adversely affect the natural beauty of the area. There is an unexplored local zoning
and public review context that is significant to the history of the development and
the wider zoning and development history of Little Rock. As the city expanded
west, there was a common single-family suburban neighborhood reaction to higher
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
10
density residential development which the Georgetown developers chose to
challenge early on in the developmental history of what is now Midtown.
Moreover, letters regarding the Georgetown Apartments in Richmond, Virginia
dated 1961 from project supporters and Richmond city officials were included as
support documents to the 1962 rezoning application to Little Rock. These
documents provide evidence to the nomination’s connections to Georgetown
developments in other cities, but the letters are not mentioned in the nomination.
Staff recommends inclusion of the letters as evidence of Georgetown’s relationship
to contemporary ‘Georgetown’ development in other states and the shared
challenges of rezoning to a higher density during this era of city planning.
Lastly, the nomination lacks sufficient evidence and documentation to support
John Kessler’s involvement. Documentation shows a high involvement, rather, by
Peter Edwards, President of Devco, Inc. and President of PeterJohn of
Georgetown Co. Staff recommends strengthening and making clear the
connection with Kessler if it’s to be asserted.
The nomination also excludes the development history of the 1970 expansion
whether it has any ties to Peter Edwards, John Kessler, or Prindle & Patrick. Staff
believes the 1970 Georgetown development warrants further investigation and
requires additional reasoning for its inclusion in the nomination.
The nomination is scheduled to be heard at the August 2 nd, 2023 State Review
Board meeting.
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
11
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the nomination of the Georgetown Apartments at 18
Nottingham Road to the National Register of Historic Places for local significance
under Criterion C and the submission of the nomination to the State Review Board
with the above-mentioned comments, including the recommendation to further
ground the nomination in the contexts of Little Rock zoning, public review, and city
planning. Staff additionally recommends the below historic documents to be
integrated into the nomination:
1. City of Little Rock. “Zoning case file Z-00526.” 1962. Available at:
http://web.littlerock.state.ar.us/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=141225&dbid=0&rep
o=CityofLittleRock&cr=1
2. City of Little Rock. “Zoning case file Z-02180.” 1968. Available at:
http://web.littlerock.state.ar.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=154083&dbid=0&r
epo=CityofLittleRock&cr=1
3. City of Little Rock. Ordinance No. 10,987. 1959. Available at:
http://web.littlerock.state.ar.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=77290&dbid=0&re
po=CityofLittleRock
4. Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce. “Little Rock Apartment Survey.”
June 1975. Available at:
https://cdm15728.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p15728coll3/id/484508/
rec/6
G. COMMISSION ACTION July 6, 2023
Ratzlaff, Staff, made a presentation to the commission. Chair Jones asked if the
applicant or an authorized representative was present. None being present, the
commission proceeded. Jones invited public comment. No member of the public
chose to speak.
Commissioner Fennell said he agreed with Staff’s analysis and added that he
found little architectural merit within the development. He said the Georgian
Revival influences for which the development is named were too little and poorly
done. He stated that the nomination does not address the number of alterations to
the development since the 1970s, including the replacement of windows and infill
of window openings. Fennell shared that he believed the development was not
architecturally significant enough for nomination under Criterion C and the
argument for local significance, based on community planning and development,
July 6, 2023
NR ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: NR2023-004
12
was not supported well enough in the nomination. Fennell said he also agreed that
the nomination did not make a strong or clear enough argument for a significant
connection to John Kessler. He said he did not want to deny recommendation to
the National Register because he supported the continued use and rehabilitation
of the development, but he did not feel that it met the level of significance or criteria
requirements.
Chair Jones and Vice Chair Aleman agreed. Chair Jones said many property
owners were pursuing National Register nominations in order to be eligible for tax
credits. Jones said it was possible the owner was nominating the property with the
main purpose of becoming tax credit eligible.
Commissioner DeGraff said several of the footnote source links in the nomination
led to inaccessible information or the links were broken. He asked if this was
typical. Ratzlaff said some of the online research sources for nominations were
accessed through subscriptions and were inaccessible otherwise.
Vice Chair Aleman asked what actions were available to the commission in this
circumstance.
Ratzlaff pointed to the Arkansas Certified Local Government Procedures, section
V. B. 3., provided in the staff report. She said that if the commission finds that a
property should not be nominated because it does not meet the National Register
criteria for eligibility, the commission will inform AHPP and the property owner.
Additionally, all reports and comments from the commission will be submitted to
the State Review Board and the National Parks Service alongside the nomination.
Deputy City Attorney Sherri Latimer reminded the commission that a motion must
be presented in the positive pursuant to Robert’s Rules of Order.
Commissioner Fennell made a motion to recommend approval of the nomination
of the Georgetown Apartments to the National Register of Historic Places. There
was not a second. The motion failed.
Ratzlaff said the commission’s comments would be provided to the Arkansas
Historic Preservation Program for the upcoming State Review Board meeting in
August. If approved at the state level, the nomination would see final review by the
National Parks Service and the commission’s comments would be included in
documentation.
ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: HDC2023-018
NAME: Signage
LOCATION: 1301 Cumberland
OWNER/AUTHORIZED AGENT:
Andrea Andrews
Southern Magnolia House, LLC
3603 Lacoste Drive,
Jonesboro, AR 72404
Figure 6. 1301 Cumberland, Little Rock, AR
July 6, 2023
ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: HDC2023 -018
14
AREA: 0.17 acres NUMBER OF LOTS : 1 WARD: 1
HISTORIC DISTRICT: MacArthur Park Historic District
HISTORIC STATUS: Contributing
CURRENT ZONING: R4A (CUP) – Low Density Residential with a Conditional Use Permit
A. BACKGROUND
Location
The subject property is located at 1301 Cumberland. The property’s legal
description is “Lot 1, Block 48 of the City of Little Rock L3 Subdivision, Little Rock,
Pulaski County, Arkansas.”
Context
The subject property is the site
of a one-story single-family brick
veneer structure, built c. 1885
and greatly modified c. 1920-
1939. The structure is currently
being used as office space.
The structure is a Contributing
resource identified in the 2007
National Register survey form,
PU2910, as a one-story, single-
family Tudor Revival. The home
is frame construction with brick
veneer on a closed pier
foundation. The structure has a
rectangular plan with a
composite shingle cross gable
roof with a shed dormer.
Windows are double-hung with
six-over-one arrangement and
stationery with multi-pane
arrangement. The front door is
arched in the Tudor style. The
structure has two brick
chimneys. The 1885 home was
originally frame construction with
Figure 7. Location of 1301 Cumberland within the MacArthur Park
Historic District.
July 6, 2023
ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: HDC2023 -018
15
wood cladding—likely weatherboard siding—and was modified in c. 1920-1939 to
incorporate Tudor Revival features popular of the period. It is also possible that the
original 19th century structure was demolished before the existing structure was
constructed.
Recent/Previous Action
In 2004, a COA (HDC2004-011) was issued to Karen Butler Miller for the
construction of a new carriage house and courtyard and the demolition of the
existing accessory structure.
In 2006, an amended COA (HDC2006-018) was issued to Karen Butler Miller as a
result of enforcement action.
In 2006, a CUP (Z-8061) was issued to Karen Redding (née Miller) to allow a
conditional use permit for an accessory dwelling.
In 2008, a COC (HDC2008-024) was issued to Karen Redding for the painting of
non-masonry features and the restoration of two windows.
In 2008, a COC (HDC2008-029) was issued to Karen Redding for paint.
In 2009, a CUP (Z-8061-A) was issued to Karen Redding to allow for use of the
existing structure as offices for psychological counselors.
In 2011, a COA (HDC2011-022) was issued to George DeRoeck for the installation
of a steel front yard fence.
In 2023, a CUP (Z-8061-B) was issued to Andrea Andrews to allow the use of a
General Office in an R-4A zoned area.
Figure 8. 1301 Cumberland, 1897 Sanborn Map. Figure 9. 1301 Cumberland, 1939 Sanborn Map.
July 6, 2023
ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: HDC2023 -018
16
In 2023, a COC (HDC2023-017) was issued to Andrea Andrews for reroof and roof
repairs.
No other actions were found.
B. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The application requests to install a flush mounted sign on the front façade of the
property.
C. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
See site photos (Attachment A) and application packet (Attachment B). A Quapaw
Quarter historic marker sign exists on the front façade chimney.
D. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
At the time of distribution, there were no comments regarding this application.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site and all neighborhood
associations registered with the City of Little Rock that surround the site were
notified of the public hearing.
E. ANALYSIS:
The application requests the installation of one (1) 130 mm x 150 mm copper flush
mounted sign on the front façade of the property to the left of the front entrance.
The sign will read: “Compass Rose Realty, LLC Est. 2019”. The sign material will
be 3 mm thick copper with engraved lettering. The sign will be mounted into the
mortar joints, not the brick masonry.
Section VII. E. “Design Guidelines for Site Design: Signs” of the MacArthur Park
Design Guidelines state:
“Signs should be subordinate to the architecture and overall character throughout
the district. Historic signs should be preserved, including “ghost” signs on the sides
of buildings.”
“1. Attached to Building: Signs attached to a building should not cover or obscure
architectural features. Signs may be painted on windows, doors, or small panels
at entrances or on awnings. Small signs may be flush-mounted on a building wall;
July 6, 2023
ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: HDC2023 -018
17
may be hung on porches between posts; or may project from the structure. A sign
on a masonry wall should be mounted in the mortar, not the masonry. […]
3. Materials for signs: Materials used for signs should be traditional, such as
finished wood, glass, copper, or bronze, not plywood, plastic, unfinished wood,
neon or other internally lighted materials, or flashing lights. Materials should be
compatible with the building materials.
4. Design of signs: The design of the signs should be appropriate to the building,
in size, lettering, and style. Business logos or symbols are desirable. If several
businesses share a building, coordinate the signs. Flashing, rotating, moveable,
or portable signs should not be used.
5. Lighting of signs: Lighting of signs should be from remote sources, preferably
from the ground aimed directly at the sign and shielded from street view. Lighting
should not use visible bulbs, internal sources or luminous paint.”
Staff finds the signage request to be consistent with the guidelines. The sign is
subordinate to the architecture of the structure and compatible with the overall
character of the district. The sign is consistent with the guidelines in location,
material, installation methodology, and design. There is no mention of signage
lighting in the application.
Figure 11. Proposed signage location and size shown below black arrow
on front facade of 1301 Cumberland, submitted by applicant. Figure 10. Engraved sign examples from Etsy shop submitted by applicant.
July 6, 2023
ITEM NO.: ONE FILE NO.: HDC2023 -018
18
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the application with the following conditions:
1. Obtain required sign permit.
G. COMMISSION ACTION July 6, 2023
Ratzlaff, Staff, made a presentation to the commission. Chair Jones asked if the
applicant or an authorized representative was present.
Andrea Andrews, owner and applicant, addressed the commission and provided a
summary of the application.
Jones invited public comment. No member of the public chose to speak.
Vice Chair Aleman made a motion to approve the application with staff
recommendations. Commissioner Fennell seconded. The motion passed with 6
ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent.
July 6, 2023
VI. Other Matters
1. Letter of Support – URC NPS Grant – Dunbar Junior & Senior High and
Junior College
Ratzlaff shared with the commission that the City of Little Rock, in
partnership with the Quapaw Quarter Association and the Little Rock
School District, were applying for a National Park Service grant, the
Underrepresented Communities Grant, to amend the nomination of the
Dunbar Junior and Senior High and Junior College. Ratzlaff asked if the
Commission would consider a letter of support for the grant effort to be
included in the application.
Commissioner Green said he was supportive of the grant effort and
believes the school is worthy of national significance. He spoke of his
memories of his family and neighbors attending Dunbar, the role of the
Little Rock Nine and their connection to Dunbar, and the role of the
National Dunbar Horace Mann Alumni Association. Green made a
motion for the Commission to provide a letter of support for the grant.
The motion passed unanimously by voice vote.
2. Review of the By-Laws
Ratzlaff shared with the commission that the by-laws were required to
be reviewed every three years. She suggested at the next scheduled
meeting the Commissioners prepare to discuss what changes or
updates, if any, should be made.
3. COA Expirations
Ratzlaff shared with the commission that approved Certificates of
Appropriateness currently had no expiration terms. A COA could be
granted, and the approval would never expire even if the project was never
acted on or completed. Ratzlaff said this lack of a time limit could cause,
and has caused, complications for property owners, staff, and the
commission. All other city permits, including zoning permits for conditional
and special uses, have expirations. In 2012 and 2013, the commission
discussed and approved rules for COA expiration. The implementation of
these rules would require an amendment to section 23—115 of the Little
Rock Code, requiring Board of Directors approval, then incorporated into
the commission’s bylaws. Section 23—115 of the Little Rock Code was
never amended for this purpose and these rules were not implemented.
Ratzlaff asked the commission if they would like to revisit setting expiration
terms for approved COAs. Vice Chair Aleman said she believed this
should be revisited. The other commissioners agreed. Ratzlaff said she
could put together a staff report for the next meeting and include past
actions of the commission concerning this subject.
July 6, 2023
4.Enforcement Issues
There were no enforcement issues to present.
5.Certificates of Compliance
HDC2023-019 -803 Rock Street -reroof and roof repairs
HDC2023-020 -1405 Cumberland -window air conditioning unit removal
and mini split installation
HDC2023-021 -803 Rock Street-siding repair
6.Citizen Communication
No citizens chose to speak during this time.
7.Adjournment
There was a motion to adjourn. The meeting ended at 4:57pm.
Attest
Chair Date
Staff Date