Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDC2015-025 1401 scott reportPage 1 of 8 DATE: December 14, 2015 APPLICANT: Mark Brown and Jill Judy, Lofts at Soma, LLC ADDRESS: 1401 Scott COA REQUEST: Erect Fence PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 1401 Scott. The property’s legal description is “Lot 1R Eastside Lofts Replat, Replat of Block 20 Original City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas." The applicants own the classroom building at 1401 Scott Street and the associated parking lot along 15th only. They do not own the Auditorium building at the corner of Daisy Bates and Cumberland nor do they own the parking lot along Daisy Bates Drive. This school building was built in 1904. The 2006 survey form states: “This colonial revival school has brick veneer and stone (cast) trim with large running bond stone base. Classical pediment and columns decorate the building entries.” The architect is noted as Frank Gibb. It is considered a "Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic District. This application is to erect a six foot tall steel picket fence with two automatic car g ates and two man gates of the same height to enclose the parking lot of the property. PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE: On November 19, 2015, the Capitol Zoning District Commission approved a six foot fence along the exterior of the parking lot with two car gates and two man gates at the interior circulation sidewalks. This application is in the area of dual protection between the CZDC and the HDC. On February 12, 2015, a COC was issued to Mark Brown for repair of a cheek wall and sidewalk repair on the west side of the building. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 STAFF REPORT ITEM NO. Two. Location of Project Page 2 of 8 View looking west on 15th Street Dual protection area View looking north on Cumberland Street Contributing and Non-contributing map PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND GUIDELINES: This application is to erect a six foot tall steel picket fence with two automatic car gates and two man (pedestrian) gates of the same height to enclose the parking lot of the property. The fence will be similar to the Montage Plus Classic Style with 3 rails. There is planned to be a sliding car gate at the eastern entrance to the parking lot from Cumberland Street. The other car gate, which will swing toward 15th Street, will be at the western end of the lot. There will be two man gates, one at each sidewalk. The fence would be located behind the hedge. Without the aid of a survey, it is unsure exactly where the property line is located. The fence would need to be placed on private property, not in the public right of way. On page 58, the Guidelines state: Style of Fence proposed Page 3 of 8 3. Fences and Retaining Walls: Fencing on street frontage & front yard—36” Rear yard fencing—72” Iron, wood, stone, or brick fences or walls that are original to the property (at least 50 years old) should be preserved. If missing, they may be reconstructed based on physical or pictorial evidence. Sometimes a low stone or brick wall supports an iron or wooden fence. Fencing material should be appropriate to the style and period of the building. Cast iron fences were common through the Victorian period and should be retained and maintained. Wrought iron and bent wire fences are also historic. Fences may be located in front, side, or rear yards, generally following property lines. Fences with street frontage should be no taller than three feet (36”) tall. On wood fences, pickets should be no wider than four inches (4”) and set no farther apart than three inches (3“). The design shall be compatible with and proportionate to the building. For larger scale properties, fence heights should be appropriate to the scale of the building and grounds. Fences in the rear yards and those on side property lines without street frontage may be 72’’ tall. The privacy fence should be set back from the front façade of the structure at least halfway between the front and back walls of the main structure. Wood board privacy fences should be made of flat boards in a single row (not stockade or shadowbox), and of a design compatible with the structure. Chain-link fences may be located only in rear yards, where not readily visible from the street, and should be coated dark green or black. Screening with plant material is recommended. Fences should not have brick, stone, or concrete piers or posts unless based on pictorial or physical evidence. Freestanding walls of brick, stone, or concrete are not appropriate. New retaining landscape walls are discouraged in front yards. Certain front yards that are in close proximity to the sidewalk may feature new walls that match the materials of the building and be consistent with historic walls in the neighborhood. Landscaping walls should match the materials of the building and be consistent with historic walls in the neighborhood. The guidelines were modified to acknowledge large sites with larger scale buildings. The three story buildings, along with the auditorium, are the only two structures on this entire block. This is not the largest building in the district, nor is it the largest parcel of land, but it is well within the top ten in size. It is certainly the largest south of I-630. The Guidelines state: “For larger scale properties, fence heights should be appropriate to the scale of the building and grounds.” The height of the hedge when walking down the sidewalk is in excess of six fe et tall. However, there is a slope to the ground such that the height of the hedge when in the parking lot is less. The hedge height along the Cumberland Street side and the east portion of the 15th Street side is between four and a half to five feet tall when measured from the parking lot asphalt. The Page 4 of 8 western third of the 15th Street side measures a foot less in height, from three and one half to four feet tall. With the height of the hedge, approximately the top 18” to 30” of the fence would be above the top of the hedge. If walking on the adjacent sidewalk, it would be difficult to see the fence over the hedge because of the height and width of the hedge. The fence would be visible from a distance either walking or driving. The car gate would be clearly visible at the 15th Street entrance, but the car gate off Cumberland may not be as visible with the landscaping and the fact that it is perpendicular to the street. Of course, this depends on the hedge being maintained at its current height. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no comments regarding this application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions: 1. Provide proof that the fence will be built on private property. 2. Obtaining a fencing permit. COMMISSION ACTION: December 14, 2015 Brian Minyard, Staff, made a presentation to the Commission. Commissioner Dick Kelley was unsure on the orientation of the parking lot. Staff and other commissioners helped orient him. Mark Brown, the applicant, has photos that were passed around to the commissioners. He explained where the parking lot was. He also explained why they felt they needed a six foot fence around the parking lot. It is to fence the parking lot on the south side of the 41 unit apartment building converted in 2001. Detail of fence and detail of car gate on right Page 5 of 8 Commissioner Jeremiah Russell asked what the ultimate purpose of the fence was. Mr. Brown stated that the area was in transition and have completed a lot of upgrades to the units. They need to attract upscale people to be renters to pay for the costs. To obtain the maximum rents from the units, they feel that they need the fenced parking lots with a six-foot tall fence. Chair Toni Johnson asked if they planned to keep and maintain the hedge. Mr. Brown said that they will keep the hedge and have added plants it the middle to fill in gaps. Commissioner Russell asked if it was just to enclose the parking area for automotive security. Mr. Brown stated it was also security for people entering and existing the building at night. He added that the parking is on one side of the building and the back. The fence is not exactly in the front of the building, mostly on the side and back. The fence would not obstruct the view of the front from Scott Street. Commissioner Russell commented on the neighbors to the east along Cumberland. Mr. Brown stated that they looked at the back of the building. Commissioner Page Wilson stated that they see the hedge. Mr. Brown expressed that they want cast finials instead of the pressed bar finials as described in the brochure and amended his application. There were no citizens that wished to speak on the application. Commissioner Becky Pekar made a motion to approve the fence at 1401 Scott with cast finials on top of the fence. Commissioner Jennifer Carman seconded and the motion was approved with a vote of 6 ayes and 1 no (Russell). Commissioner Russell state d that the guidelines say that the fence should not be more that 36” tall, the scale of the building has nothing to do with the height of the fence, and that the hedge is temporary. Page 6 of 8 Application Page 7 of 8 Cover Letter Page 8 of 8 Site Plan not to scale.