Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDC2008-001 staff report. LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 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. One. DATE: December 10, 2007 APPLICANT: Jennifer Polk, C/M Restoration ADDRESS: 315 East 6th Street COA Replace all existing windows with full screens and remove window ac REQUEST: units PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 315 East 6th Street. The property's legal description is the" west 65' of lots 10, 11 and 12 of Block 41, Original City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas." The building is known as the Peachtree Apartments and is a circa 1920's building with painted brick. The 1988 Survey considers it a "Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic District. The application is to "Replace deteriorated existing windows with high quality Kolbe double glazed windows with exterior aluminum cladding and same pane/light arrangement as original existing windows. Location of Project All window a/c units will be eliminated and full screens installed on windows. Air conditioning units to replace the window units will be split package units that will be mounted on the roof behind the parapet. The units will not be visible from the street and are not subject to review of the commission. The applicant is also doing interior renovation of the baths, kitchens, wiring, flooring, etc., also items that are not subject to review by this commission. PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE: No previous actions on this site were located with a search of the files. 2 Existina front elevation ��^plt t_ F h '�� l - Existing east elevation Existing rear elevation Existing west elevation WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND GUIDELINES: Page 52 of the current guidelines state: Windows: Windows should be preserved in their original location, size, and design with their original materials and number of panes. Stained, leaded, beveled, or patterned glass, which is a character -defining feature of a building, should not be removed. Windows should not be added to the primary facade or to a secondary facade if easily visible. Windows should be repaired rather than replaced. However, if replacement is necessary due to severe deterioration, the replacement should match, as closely as possible, the original in materials and design. Replacement windows should not have snap -on or flush muntins. Unless they originally existed, jalousie, awning, and picture windows and glass brick are inappropriate on an historic building. Screen and Storm Windows: 3 Screen and storm windows should be wood or baked -on enamel or anodized aluminum in dark colors and fit within the window frames, not overlap the frames. Screens should be full -view. Storm windows may also be mounted on the inside of windows. Half screen and screen or storm windows smaller than original window, are not recommended. �-:xisting w►naow noco i t Existing window photo 3 Existing window photo 4 The cover letter states that the windows will be preserving the size and pane/light arrangement of the existing windows. All windows are to be double hung sash windows El with two over two pane/light divided horizontally, arrangement. The windows will have full screen over all of them. The window sizes range from 44 1/2" x 53 1/2' to 22" x 46". This replacement of windows will replace the entire window unit from brick to brick. The windows specified are "Sterling Double Hung" by Kolbe Windows and Doors. A brochure has been provided for each commissioner. 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 building permit for all interior and exterior work. 2. Project to be completed within 180 days of obtaining permit. STAFF UPDATE: December 10, 2007 On December 10, 2007, Staff was informed that this building has a facade easement placed upon it. This will change the recommendation of Staff. The applicant, in the hearing, will need to clarify the project scope as it pertains to whole window replacement or just sash replacements for all windows. The full view screens will need to be addressed as to how they will be attached to the windows. The Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, a division of the State of Arkansas Department of Heritage, will need to approve any modifications to the structure as to whether or not that modification violates the facade easement. If the AHPP is satisfied with the submittal/proposal that is part of their process for facade easement changes/modifications, then Staff will recommend approval of the changes to the windows. Copies of all submittals to the AHPP will be provided to the HDC Staff. Only after written approval has been granted by the AHPP, will a COA be issued. If the modifications will void the facade easement, the Staff recommendation will be Denial. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To be determined at meeting. COMMISSION ACTION: December 10, 2007 Mr. Minyard noted that the legal notice had been satisfied. Chairman Marshall Peters advised the applicant that with only three members present, it would take positive votes from all three commissioners. The applicant was offered to defer one month. The applicant, Charles Marratt stated the he did not want to defer the item. Brian Minyard, Staff, stated that this morning he was informed that there was a facade easement on the building and that through a misunderstanding or miscommunication of the scope of the project, that he would have the applicant state for the commission the scope of the project. He continued that Boyd Maher, of AHPP, was present and that he could advise about the facade easement. He said the Applicant would amend or clarify his application during the meeting. He also stated that the Staff Recommendation would be announced during the meeting. Jennifer Polk, the applicant, stated that she wished to get an approval from the HDC subject to the approval of the AHPP. Charles Marratt, the applicant, noted the he had originally filed the paperwork for the facade easement and was aware of it. His purpose is to preserve the building. He noted that the building currently has storm windows on it and window ac units. His application is to replace the old sashes with a new sash that is aluminum clad. The frames of the windows would remain intact. The screen would be full screen with aluminum frames, like the original ones would have been in the 1930's. He stated that they would repair the mortar and repaint the brick. The wood finishes on the front door would be re -stained and resealed. Any additional awnings will be filed in a later application. The roof will be replaced with a PVC roof system with the ac units to be placed on top of the roof. He described the interior work to be completed. Mr. Minyard asked about the front awning. There was a discussion on the repair/replacement of the front awning. It was mentioned that if the front awning was only replacing the fabric, with the same frame and location, that it could fall under maintenance and be approved by Staff through a COC, a Certificate of Compliance. Mr. Minyard asked about the window screens. Mr. Marratt responded that there will be a trimline metal frame, with full view screens that will fit sung into the frames. The storm windows will be removed. Commissioner Julie Wiedower asked if they had historic photos of the buildings. Mr. Marratt said that he had not seen them. They may be at the QQA. He said that he believed these windows to be the original. Chairman Marshall Peters asked if the roof was the same as a torch down roof. Mr. Marratt responded that it was not and explained about the roofing system. Chairman Peters asked about the heat and air systems. Mr. Marratt and he had a discussion on the energy efficiency and design of the systems. Boyd Maher, of the AHPP, stated that if he understood the proposal as stated, he did not anticipate any problems with the application as it related to the facade easement on the building. He stated that Mr. Marratt would need to go though his process to proceed. Mr. Marratt stated that he had started the paperwork and would work with the AHPP on all details. Staff read its recommendation to the Commission and the audience. Staff recommendation is approval with the following conditions: 1. All copies of submittals to the AHPP to be given to the HDC. 2. Written approval of facade easements modification signed by AHPP to be presented to HDC Staff. 0 3. COA to be issued when above items have been satisfied. 4. Obtain building permit. 5. Work to be completed within 180 days of issuing COA. Commissioner Wiedower made a motion to approve the application subject to conditions as stated. Commissioner Susan Bell seconded and the motion was approved with a vote of with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. 7