HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report demo wall hdc16-045 finalPage 1 of 8
DATE: January 9, 2017
APPLICANT: Mark Brown and Jill Judy, Little Rock Historic Properties
ADDRESS: 904 Scott Street
COA REQUEST: Demolish Wall
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 904 Scott Street. The
property’s legal description is “South 37 feet of the East
110 feet of Lot 11 and the East 11.5 feet of the South 31
feet of the west 40 feet of Lot 11, Block 10, Original City
of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas."
This single family house, which was converted to
multifamily later, was built in 1871. The 2006 survey form
states: “This two story Italianate house has wide cornice
and paired brackets supporting overhang. Windows and
doors are hooded at front, have vertical mullions and
entry door is typical Italianate. Built by prominent
businessman. House moved from original location at SW
corner of 9th and Scott.” It is considered a "Contributing
Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic District.
This application is to demolish part of a concrete wall in
the rear of this property.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On April 13, 2015, a COC was issued to Mark Brown and Jill Judy for exterior renovation due to
fire damage.
On February 12, 2015, a COC was issued to Mark Brown and Jill Judy for exterior maintenance
of siding, windows and brick.
On September 4, 2014, a COC was issued to Mark Brown and Jill Judy for a temporary
construction fence and interior remodel.
On October 6, 2009, a COC was issued to Mary Buchannan to reroof the house with standing
seam metal roof.
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. B.
Location of Project
Page 2 of 8
On April 21, 2000, a COA was approved and issued to Mary Buchannan for the installation of
driveways at 900/908/916 and 920 Scott Street.
Sketch of property lines Wall section nearest house
Existing south elevation with wall to left Existing north elevation with wall to right
PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT
AND GUIDELINES:
The proposal is to remove the portion of the concrete wall that is on this property that was once
a part of a 4 stall garage structure.
The Guidelines address demolishing buildings from the neighborhood. It does not address
removing the remainder of parts of buildings. The roof structure and the doors (if it ever had
any) were removed prior to the current owner purchasing the property. The 1998 aerial photo
shows it without a roof or additional walls or doors.
The Sanborn maps below show the changes to the area. The current concrete wall was not
shown in the 1913 map. The 1913 and previous maps have different sheds of different sizes
and materials on the site. The wall in question appears to be part of the out building that first
appears in the 1939 Sanborn Map. It is labeled “A 4 Stalls Conc.” which translates to
Automobile use, 4 stalls, and concrete construction. Since the last map of 1950, the structure at
Page 3 of 8
900 Scott has been removed, the house at 113 E 9th has been demolished, the house at 908
burned last year and was removed, the shed at 908 was removed, and the roof at the concrete
garage stalls on the site had been removed.
1939 Sanborn Map (current building is labeled
Clinic)
Detail of wall to be removed (rotated to match
map to the right)
This application is to remove only the portion of the wall that lies within the property of 908 Scott
Street. The wall sits within inches of the property line. If the project scope is to return the house
and grounds to a pre-1913 look, it would be appropriate to remove the concrete wall. The wall
does provide security of sorts from the property at 908 Scott and the properties on Main Street
as it is a visual and physical barrier. The ultimate use of the 113 E 9th property will solidify the
argument to remove the wall.
Demolition of this wall was not included in the demolition of the house at 113 E 9th. That house
was demolished during the week of November 28, 2016. A deferral to a later hearing to add the
remainder of the wall to this application would resolve the issue of the wall in total. That would
require re-notifying the property owners.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no
comments regarding this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a demolition permit.
COMMISSION ACTION: December 12, 2016
For additional information, see item at 904 Scott Porch Reconstruction, HDC16-044. Ms. Judy
asked if the commission would defer this and the other item to keep them as a package.
Commissioner Johnson made a motion to defer the items for additional information. The motion
was seconded and was passed with a vote of 4 ayes, 1 no (Russell), 1 open position, and 1
absent (Kelley). There was a clarification from Ms. Weldon that on procedural items as a
deferral, the majority in attendance is sufficient for passage.
Page 4 of 8
STAFF UPDATE: January 9, 2017
No additional information was submitted on this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a demolition permit.
COMMISSION ACTION: January 9, 2017
Brian Minyard, Staff, made a presentation of the item to the Commission. There were no
questions of Staff by the Commission.
Vice Chair Holder asked a question on the permits. Mr. Minyard stated that it was just a matter
of increasing the amount of the building permit that they already had.
Commissioner Toni Johnson asked the applicant why they had not asked to remove the entire
wall. Mr. Mark Brown stated that they had not added demolition of the wall to the house
demolition at 119 E 9th at the time of that application. They did not want to add extra items to
that application. He continued that he did not have a formal presentation but would answer any
questions that they had.
No citizens were present to speak.
A motion to approve the item as submitted to remove a part of the wall with Staff
recommendations was made by Commissioner BJ Bowen and seconded by Commissioner
Jeremiah Russell. The motion was approved with 5 ayes, 0 noes, 1 recuse (Kelley) and 1 open
position.
Page 5 of 8
Application
Page 6 of 8
Cover Letter
Page 7 of 8
Contributing and Non-contributing map
Page 8 of 8
Survey of property