HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDC18-034 Staff Report 1002 Cumberlnd 215-221 E 10th 2
DATE: January 14, 2019
APPLICANT: Randy Mourning, Angel Properties LLC
ADDRESS: 1002 Cumberland, 215-221 E 10th Street
FILE NUMBER: HDC18-034
COA REQUEST: Fencing
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 1002 Cumberland,
215-221 E 10th Street. The property’s legal description is
“Lots 11 and 12, Block 24, Original City of Little Rock,
Pulaski County, Arkansas."
This site has three buildings on it. From the west, they
are as follows:
215 - 217 E 10th street is a multifamily building that was
built in c 1905. The 2006 survey form states: “This
apartment building is built as a standard early twentieth
century commercial building with a craftsman style
porch.” It is considered a "Contributing Structure" to the
MacArthur Park Historic District.
219 – 221 E 10th Street, the Brook Apartments, is a
multifamily building was built c 1890. The 2006 survey
form states: “An unadorned Italianate/Second Empire
structure with a flat roof, shallow arched windows and extensive brick detailing. Additions have
been added to the back of the structure.” It is considered a "Contributing Structure" to the
MacArthur Park Historic District. The 36’ metal fence is shown in the photos of the 2007 survey.
1000-1002 Cumberland Street, the Caroline Row Apartments, is a multifamily building was built
c 1890. The 2006 survey form states: “An unadorned Italianate/Second Empire structure with a
flat roof, shallow arched windows and elaborate brick detailing. Stairs have been added to the
back of the structure.” It is considered a "Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic
District. The 36’ metal fence is shown in the photos of the 2007 survey.
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
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. Five.
Location of Project
This application is for Fencing. This will replace missing gates along the street in the 36” fence
as well as installing additional sections of fence and additional gates on both 10th and
Cumberland Streets. The parking lot to the south will be enclosed with a combination of 6’ wood
and 6’ metal fence with drive gates.
A letter of support from AHPP is included near the end of the staff report.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On March 1, 1995, a COA was approved and issued to Angel Properties to reinstall the original
fence.
Existing fence from the corner of
Cumberland and 10th Streets looking
south
Existing fence along 10th Street looking east
PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT
AND GUIDELINES:
The applicant was able to find the original
manufacturer for the fence and has submitted the
matching gates as replacement gates. They also
were able to locate missing filigree on the gate
posts to match. The 3’ fence to match the existing
historic fence will be a three-rail fence with 3/8”
square pickets and spears 36” in height to match
existing with gate posts with #3 Castle Tops with
steel filigree inserts and new gates shown as
“Traditional” from submittal from Stewart Iron
Works Company. See graphic later in this report.
On the 10th Street side, the proposal is to add a
section of 36” tall metal fence to match and a
double walk gate between 215-217 E 10th and
219-221 E 10th Street. A new gate will be installed
at 219 E 10th Street and a section of fence to the
Contributing and Non-contributing map
west. A new double gate will be installed at 221 E 10th Street. A new single walk gate will be
installed at 1002 Cumberland on the northwest entrance.
On the Cumberland Street side, the proposal is to add a metal man gate at 1002 Cumberland
on the east entrance. The steps off of the porch will be moved from the east side of the porch to
the north side of the porch. A new concrete walk will be installed from the porch to the
Cumberland Street sidewalk and the gate will be installed at that point. New 36” fencing will be
installed along with the existing to the corner of the building north of the exterior stair. At that
point, the 6’ fence will start. Below on page 9 is a graphic of the fence. The decorative post in
the graphic below on the left will be at the gates, while the plain post will be installed at the
building edges.
Matching gate shown between existing fence for fencing and gates on 10th
Street and Cumberland Street.
Post on left at gates
and post on right to be
installed at edge of
buildings.
A combination of a 6’ tall metal fence and a 6’ wood fence will enclose the parking lot that is to
the south of the three buildings. The metal fence will intersect the corner of 1002 Cumberland
north of the exterior stair and extend toward the street. It will then be parallel to Cumberland
Street with both a drive gate and a man gate and then proceed south to the property line. This
property is zoned R-4A which specifies a 5’ setback from Cumberland Street for any fence or
gate over 48”. That distance is approximately nine feet from the back of the sidewalk. The
proposed plan will need to be adjusted for that setback or the applicant can file for a Board of
Adjustment variance on the location. The
Board of Adjustment will be a separate
public hearing with its own requirements.
The 6’ metal fence will then follow the south
line of the parking lot parallel to the building
at 1008 Cumberland. At the corner of the
house (not including the porch), the 6’
metal fence will be terminated and a 6’ tall
wood privacy fence will be installed. That
wood fence will continue all the way to the
alley along that south property line. At the
alley, the 6’ metal fence will start again and
proceed north to the rear corner 215 E 10th
Existing Fence at the Clayton Apts.
Street building and also include a drive gate.
The 6’ metal fence will be to match The Clayton Apartments with the exception of having 3 rails
to better match the existing historic 3 rail fencing. Two slide operators with pinch v rollers at
each end of the parking will be installed. The wood fence will be a 6’ tall pine fence with dog ear
top.
The existing private dumpster located at the southwest corner of the parking lot will need to be
screened to conform to code requirements. The screening required is an opaque fence at least
24” above the top of the dumpster not to exceed 8 feet in height (Sec. 36-523 and Sec. 15-95).
The proposal is to enclose the dumpster in an 11’ by 10’ area with gates on the north side of the
enclosure. The dumpster is pictured in the photo below.
Staff believes that this application is generally appropriate. The 6’ fence and vehicle gate will
need to be moved 5’ off the property line to conform to zoning standards or the applicant will
need to file for a variance with the Board of Adjustment. A question to ask is if the introduction
of another type of fencing, the wood fence on the south property line, is as appropriate as it
would be if the applicant continued the metal fence for the entirety of the fence. The pro -rated
cost of replacement of the wood fence would offset the longer life span of the metal fence. The
use on the other side of the wood fence is the office at 1008 S Cumberland in the two story
building and the associated parking behind the building.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were two
comments regarding this application. One was regarding whether the dumpster needed to be
screened and one of a neutral nature.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends deferral of this item due to improper notice being made to the property
owners in the area of influence.
COMMISSION ACTION: December 10, 2018
The notices for this item were incomplete. Staff recommended deferral of the item. A motion
was made to defer this item to the January 14, 2019 hearing by Vice Chair Jeremiah Russell
Photo of parking lot from Cumberland Street Photo of parking lot from alley camera facing
southeast
and was seconded by Commissioner Robert Hodge. The motion passed with a vote of 6 ayes, 0
noes and 1 absent (Frederick).
UPDATE: January 14, 2018
Changes were made to the application since the original submittal. The final plan for the
fencing is included later in this report. Changes have been incorporated into the text above.
The dumpster will be enclosed with a wood fence per the City’s code.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a building permit.
2. Installation of eastern fence 5’ off property line unless variance is granted by Board of
Adjustment.
3. Submittal of final scaled drawing showing tree locations to reflect new fence location
along Cumberland Street, mechanical gate openers, and dumpster screening.
COMMISSION ACTION: January 14, 2019
Brian Minyard, Staff, made a presentation of the item. He commented that he had one neutral
comment on the screening of the dumpster and another neutral comment on the fencing.
Randy Mourning, a partner in Angel properties, said that tenants had requested the fence for a
more secure property. 8 of 11 of his renters are female. He thought it would be a benefit for the
neighborhood. The existing three foot fence is from the lat e 1800s and the foundry is still in
business. They will be able to complete the fence with original parts. He stated that the owner
of 1008 Cumberland is in support of the fence.
Vice Chair Russell asked about the five foot setback from Cumberland Street. He asked if it the
six foot tall gate could be moved further back to the corner of the building to be in compliance
with the guidelines. Mr. Mourning said that he would lose parking spaces if he moves the fence
to the west. He would be willing to move it if the parking lot is adequate. Mr. Minyard stated
that he believed that the five feet setback would be between the trees. Mr. Minyard believed
that he would lose a parking space if he moved the fence back to the corner of the building. Mr.
Mourning asked to keep the fence in the location as submitted.
Chair Holder wanted to clarify that the iron fence is along 10th and Cumberland and the fence
along south property line is wood. Mr. Mourning said the wood is more cost effective. He did
say that it has a shorter life span but is more concerned with hiding headlights. There was a
discussion of whether the item was required to go to the Board of Adjustment.
Vice Chair Russell referred to page 59 of the Guidelines to not impede views of the neighboring
properties. He would like to defer the item to know exactly where the fence will be put.
Shawn Overton, City Attorney’s office, offered an opportunity to defer for more information and
stated that it can be helpful for a deferral.
Mr. Mourning said that he would like to start construction of the 36’ fence section at this time
and possibly defer the taller sections.
Commissioner McSwain asked for a clarification on the deferrals and noticing process.
Vice Chair Russell believed that there were two options: 1) Amend the application to remove
the rear fencing and resubmit at a later date for it and 2) Accept the Commission ’s deferral for
all of the application and submit a scaled plan. The city would pay for the notices.
Mr. Mourning stated that the neighbor at 1008 Cumberland is in support of the fence on the
south side of the property.
Commissioner Dale Pekar asked if there was an option 3. Mr. Overton was comfortable with
waiving application fees and the city providing notice. Mr. Minyard reiterated the bylaws on
when the city provides notices. He continued that in the past splitting votes on one application
was not encouraged but not prohibited. Commissioner Robert Hodge noted that he could see
where it would be wise to separate the two. Commissioner McSwain said that we have an
applicant that went way beyond on the fence.
Chair Holder stated that this application was for different types of fences and the Commission
wants to get more information for the next meeting.
Mr. Mourning wants to provide fences for the parking area. He continued that he may be able to
provide the required parking and move the fence back 5’ and work it out in the field with city
staff. There was a discussion on the differences with the Guidelines and the city setback
ordinances.
Mr. Minyard provided the commission and the applicant with a survey of the property that
clarified the distances from the sidewalk to the property line and the distance to the corner of the
building. Vice Chair Russell stated he was willing to accept the 5’ setback on the fence.
Mr. Mourning amended his application to move his six foot tall fence along Cumberland to meet
conform to the five foot setback.
There was no public comment on the item.
Commissioner McSwain made a motion to approve with the 6’ tall section being placed 5’ off the
property line along Cumberland Street with Staff recommendations. Commissioner Amber
Jones Seconded and the motion passed with 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent (Frederick).
Application
Cover Letter
AHPP letter on conservation easement
Sketch of proposed fencing
Excerpt of Guidelines
Excerpt of Guidelines
Excerpt of Guidelines