Loading...
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