The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHDC2005-001 CORRESPONDENCE10/18/2004 22:54 5045654995 WEST CENTRAL NAC PAGE 02 City of Littic Rock Department ()f Housing & Neighhorhvod Programs John Barrow Alert Center 4200 John. Barrow Rd. Little Rock., Arkansas 72204 (501) 565.4807 Fax: (501) 565-4995 October 15, 2004 T & V ENTERPRISES LLC p. O, BOX 3862 LITTLE ROCK, ARKAN SAS 72203 RE: 604 EAST 6TH REAR ACCESSARY STRUCTURE Dear T & V ENTERPRISES LLC: Notice is hereby given that an inspection has been made vnsth a ess r Ari'Icl tur (s) located ors the above -referenced property. Under p Section $-432 (c) of the Little Rack HousinCode of g and/os. r firet hazard. s) were found to be dilapidated, unsafe and/or constitute a health The above -stated condition of the structures, constitute a violation of the Housing Code and they are hereby declared Unsafe, This violation must be corrected within ten (10) days of your receipt of this notice, by full rehabilitation or demolition and removal. If you have any questions, please contact me at (501) 565-4807, Sincerely, CHARLIE COWART Enforcement Officer John Barrow Alert Center 10/18/2004 22:54 5045654995 WEST CENTRAL NAC PAGE 03 City of Little Rock Department of Housing & Neighborl'xood Programs West Central Alert Center 4200 John 13arrow Road — Suite B Little Rock, Arkansas 72204 r N-1 Phone501-565-4807 Re: d y iEZ= ". State of Arkansas ) County of Pulaski City of Little Rock ) ched �Gt /- being duly sworn upon oath, state that II co ted hereof in the notices) upon each of the person or firms therein addressed by depositing Pi postage fully United States mail, enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed as shown, with aelQ prapo. at Little Rack, ansss before 5: the J, —day of Code Enforcement Officer bepartment of Neighborhood Programs City of Little Rock and sworn to before me this ZPf 11 n n, TARV� , My Commission FROM :<CC FAX NO. :5012440502 Oct. 06 2004 11:44AM P2 9-22-04 I am the previous owner of the property at 504 E. 6th. st. Little Rock, AR 72202 and as I conveyed to Mr. Silas E. Valdez, to the best of my knowledge,,the storage building behind the apartment building (and part of the property) at 504 e. 6th. st. Little Rock, AR 72202 was erected on or abfl 4t 1972. The storage building is not built of the same materials, nor is it the same Architectural Style. Sinc 1y pavi d �� 8o 116rrim -1 �l III :14401 Ar 41 lu IM 0 FROM':<CC FAX NO. :5012440502 Mar. 19 2003 04:10PM P4 f (f LITTLE ROC[ EUSTORIC DISTRICT a APPLICATION F- O. R• A, CERUFI CATK Off' APPROPRIATENESS Application Da.t.e: 1. Date of Public Hc�ariDg: `72k day 2. Address of'Property, .� Q ... k..�_ f,;,-. - _ /- r7r/e 6 co: Ale — 3. Legal Description ol- Property: PIS SG c Zee ( 4. PropcM Owner (Narm.. Addrr.ss. Phnnc, 1''ax) ^f? d. 5. Own.cr's .Agent �tq�..�.�!'f?L.D•� ml,on� Paz) S� � —dS0 � 6. Project Description (:additional 1�qo iatay be added): d .d I! T% �cycrS7✓�2�►fr� � u1euAe- -- 7. Estimated Cost of Inrlprovements: 4 A . Ov Signature of Owncr or .Agent.. ** k**** R**�*** 1F W* W W W W W* k• W W* k k. k• # k W Y: k k# W W k k W* k k# W W# W' k W* k W W W W W* W k* k** k# R R k* R R* Little Rock Historic District. Commission Action (to lie completed by stz:ll•): Deried _ Deferred _Approved _ Approved with Conditions Staff Signahtre: NOTE: Should Flicrc be materia)s, size, etc.) Cram the approved COA, aPplicant shall notify Commission staff and [aloe appropriate actions. Approval by lire Conuix ssion does 1101 excuse applicant or property ti om compliance with other applic-Lble codes, ordui .ulccs or policies of Q1e. city tulless skated by the C oirunissiou or stair. Responsibility for idel:ltifying auch Andes, ordinsinces or policies reds wills the Ul.)Plic-Wlt, (wa)es•r aa9ent, Lit-deltex lc Historic llislric� Commission♦ Department of Housing rind Neighborhood Prog arns 500 W. M:irkhwn Street, # 1 ` OW ♦ I,iti:le Rock, AR 72201 ♦ Phone.; 501-915-5".60 ♦' Fay: 601-371.4-873 FROM':<CC FAX NO. :5012440502 Mar. 19 2003 04:09PM P1 FrIl—ATE •/6-- G�o. ��IsiC Fax Cover Sleet T & V ENTERPRISES .P.O. Box 3862 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 , e)w 4 a d FROM: ,Sjl,+s -Zy- RR rYe: Number of pages including cover sheet_ Message: TIME: 3 ; --rC P, e" - PHONE: 3 h 1— * 9 5-6� FAX: -371 - � 0 73 PHONE, 244-0501 FAX: 244-0502 Confidentiality,Notice: This facsimile and any accompanying documents contain confidential information which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient named above. If you have received this tclecopy in error, please immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for the destruction or the return of the documents and information to us. You are hereby notified that any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance of the contents of this telecopy information is strictly prohibited. FROM :<CC FAX NO. :5012440502 Mar. 19 2003 04:09PM P2 ou64 r sr 6r,,cA fival! arr_�l ri �'.�919 .� . 6410+,7 _ T � Ur4;l� 1�1a�1 Ago ZL r 0] �9 IP V) �. . -.P. 447 - r p aob Z I 5 iv ' FROM ' : < C C FAX NO :5012440502 7 Mar. 19 2003 04:10PM P3 N ;`t City of Little Rock Department of Planning and -Development Planning Zoning and 723 West Markham Subdivision Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 (501) 371-4790 FAX COVER SHEET DATE: °9 I G /<�- TO: J 21 41 , COMPANY: FAX NUMBER: PHONE NUMBER: I 11UT-1 DIVISION: FAX NUMBER: 501 399-3435 PHONE NUMBER: (501) TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET: COMMENTS: 6 U)r Q .Se c ct CAS tyk& l,'Sl� At CL r 0 -ES 1-1 �i A 'S C-CA h 1f'L G�ri tr`2 C � � � � 1-5 f r Instructions for Filing for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) 1. The owner or authorized representative is required to file: ♦ an application and a letter of application See attached "Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness" and return the completed form to Department of Housing & Neighborhood Programs by the designated deadline. 2. The owner/applicant shall submit one set of scaled drawings on 24" x 36" AND. eight (8) copies of the drawings on 81/2" X 14" or 11" X 17"-for either: A. Existing Buildings (i) An accurate sketch, photograph or drawing of existing elevations where changes are proposed; plus a sketch or dra«g of proposed changes. (2) A description of materials to be used and overall scheme, including but not limited to foundation, walls, windows, doors, roof and exterior surfaces and details. B. New Construction (1) A scaled (_"-1"; 1/4" preferred) drawing of all elevations showing proposed appearance and its relationship to adjacent and nearby buildings. (2) A description of materials for all exterior surfaces and details. C. Materials to be used (i) Samples of materials, brochures, -pamphlets or other literaire should be submitted with application. NOTE: All required documents for review must be submitted to staff n la er than three weeks prior to the meeting date. 3. Before the meeting, the applicant must perform the followii : ♦ give at least ten (10) days written notice of the time, place and date of the public hearing to all recorded nroneM owner (as eertdied by a licensed abstractor) within 150 feet. ♦ The form for notification ofproperty owners within 150' is the "Notice of Public Hearing," which is attached or available from staff. The Affidavit at the bottom must be signed prior to mailing notices to property owners. ♦ send the required notice of public hearing to property owners either by certified or registered mail. * post the subject property with a sign'at least ten (10) days before the meeting. (NOTE: The sign, furnished at the time of application, must be placed at the front of the property to be seen from the street. If subject property is located on a corner or fronts two streets, one sign must be posted on each side to be viewed from both streets. If the sign is destroyed or torn down, applicant must obtain a replacement from the office). 4. Five (5) business days prior to the meeting, the applicant must submit the following to staff: a. receipts of mailing and return receipts, b. certified listing of recorded property owners, and c. copy of the completed public meeting notice and Affidavit. 5. The applicant or representative must be resent at the public hearing in order to answer questions the Commission or interested parties may have. Should there be a change in what was approved (i.e.,.design, materials, size, location, etc.) staff must be notified and appropriate actiori taken; if not, a fine may be levied. 6. The applicant or representative must provide proof of ownership- of the ro-eet property or provide documentation of the owner's consent to the submission of the application. PLEASE NOTE: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE ABOVE MAY CAUSE AN APPLICATION TO BE WITHHELD UNTIL PROPERLY SUBMITTED AND MAY REQUIRE RENTOTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS OR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDED, CALL DEPARTMENT STAFF AT 918-5330. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT -COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO OWNERS Or LAND LYING WITHIN 150 FEET Or SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT Address: General Location: Owned by: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness on the above described property requesting the following changes: has been filed with the Department of Housing & Neighborhood Programs. A public hearing on said application will be held by the Historic District Commission in the Sister Cities Cor lerence Room City Hall 500 W. Markham Street on 200 at 5:00_p.m. ALL PARTIES IN INTEREST MAY APPEAR and be heard atsaid time and place or may notify the Little Rock Historic District Commission -of their -views on this matter by letter. All persons interested in this request are invited to call or visit. the Department. of Housing & Neighborhood Programs to review the application with Commission staff. AFFIDAVIT I hereby certify that. I have notified all the property owners of record within 150 feet of the above described property, that subject property is being considered for a,Certificate of Appropriateness and that a Public Hearing wrill be held before the Little Rock Historic District Commission at the time and place described. A licant owner or authorized representative): Little Rock Historic District Commission ♦ Department of Housing and Neighborhood Prograins 500 W. Markham Street, #120W ♦ Little Rock, AR 72201 ♦ Phone: 501-918-5330 ♦ Fax: 501-371-4873 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA) SUBMISSION INFORMATION I. Statement of Purpose The Little Rock Historic District Commission has resolved that any or all applications submitted for Certificates of Appropriateness, which, in the -opinion of the Commission or staff, do not contain sufficient information, shall be deferred for 30 days or any other time period set by the Commission. If an application is.not amended within the specified period, it can be dismissed. In order to avoid delays, the following -information may aid als. Additional written or visual information applicants in the preparation of submitt concerning projects is encouraged. II. Proiect Description A. A narrative thatoutlines the purpose and intent of the project, listing all principal project elements. B. Approximate- dates that construction will begin and end. C. Relationship of site improvements to -adjacent buildings and land. D. Anticipated impact of the.project on the neighborhood. III. Building DraAin s A. Facades 1. Elevations of all facades that. are -to be changed and are visible from a street. 2. These drawings should be a minimum of•i/s" -I" (1/4 - 1" is preferred). 3. Drawings should accurately depict all materials to be used, all relevant architectural details and the locations of mechanical systems (if any) and roof penetrations. B. Elevations 1. Drawings of all elevations. 2. These drawings should be a minimum of 1/8 " - 1" ('/a" - 1" is preferred). 3. Drawings should accurately depict materials to be used, relevant architectural details and the location of mechanical systems and roof penetrations. C. Wall Sections 1. A detailed -wall section drawn at a -minimum of ,/," - 1" D. Architectural Details 1. Detail drawings of decorative architectural features (brackets, doors, lintels, etc.), which may be too small to be accurately shown on the drawings but are important to the overall design. I% - IV. Site Plans Site plans are to be submitted for all applications for new construction, total rehabilitation (returning the structure to its original exterior appearance) or if the building's footprint will change. The site plan should include the following elements: A. All project components including building site, parking, open space and similar items whether or not such components lie contiguous to one another. B. Location of all structures existing and proposed, as well as driveways, walks and other hard surface features. Materials to be used should be shown and described. C. Location, type and size of existing vegetation, and in the case of new vegetation, location, type and size at the time of pluming. D. Location, height., style and direction of all exterior lighting. E. Location, height and materials to be used for fences, walls, berms and other screening features. Elevations or detail drawings of these features is required. F. Design and location of security gates, dumpster areas, mechanical equipment areas (a/c, accessory buildings, etc.) and common mail box areas. V. Other The use of site elevations showing the proposed building in context (i.e., in relation to adjacent buildings) using models and photographs, especially in the case of existing buildings being modified, is encouraged. GENERAL NOTE: All materials presented at the meetings, whether by the applicant or others, become the possession of the Little Rock PI1. ric District Commission. L K54 }fvato,-ia'DLarrGcx Cawuniba�.ow City of Little ROCK Department of Planning and Development Historic 723 West Markham Street District Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Commission Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 Facsimile: To: Frida Fax: 244-0502 Phone: 244-0501 Re: Caroline Apts. COA Recycle From: Charles Bloom Date: March 23, 2005 Pages: 12 including cover CC: N/A Comments: In order to get any permit issued, you will need to bring in the COA AND the 10 pages that follow it. Those represent the Minutes of the Meeting and what the final decision was. Fence construction is not permitted at this time. Fencing will be approved at the Staff level pending review of the Rainwater Fence and Commissioner questions. If you have questions do not hesitate to contact me. l r� ,1441 LITTLE DOCK ��oS HISTORIC DISTRICT APPLICATION FOR - A- . CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Application Date: Date of Public Hearing; 1 Oth. day of February 02-10-05 20o 5 at M 2. Address of Property: 504 E. 6th: st. Little Rock, AR 72202 3, Legal Description of Property: 7,440 s . ft . Part of TRAPNALL BLOCK IN SteVenson,s addition to City of Little Rock, Rtilaski County,AR 4. Property Owner (Name. Address, Phone, Fax): J&V Enterprises LL C P.O. Box 3862 Little Rock AR 72203 Ph ne:5 1-2440501 Fax: 501-244-0.502 _ P_.•hone: 501-733-6593 t'jQi(k) 5. Owner's Agent Thane/Fax) Fax. 501-24-4---0_9,D2 6. Project Description (additional pages may be added) ; Please see attached cover letter. 7. Estimated Cost of Improvements: $ 110 , 7 0 0.0 0 Signature of Owner or • # t * k't * W t # * # Y * t * t 3, t # * * * # # * * * * #•* # # * * * t * * # * * t # # * # * t t W # t•f W W M a • !'. a i r # . # ! ! + ! 1 # ! * * Little flock f-fistoric District Comnussion Action (to be completed by staff): Denied „_ Deferred ' _ Approved _ Approved with Conditions Staff' Signature Date313 JS NOTE, Should there be changes .(design, mat&x s, size, etc.) from the approved COA, applicant shall notify Co=aAission staff and take appropriate actions. Approval by the Commission does not excuse appkicaait or property lrom compliance with other applicable codes, 'ordinances or policies of flit city iuiless stated by the Commission or stall'. Responsibility for identifying such codes, ord4iances or policies rests with the applicant, owner or agent. Little Rock Historic District Conuhissiou ♦ Department of Housing and Neighborhood Programs 500 W. Markham Street, #120W ♦ Little Rock, Alt 72201 ♦ Phone- 601-91MS30 + Fax: 601-371-4873 60 39Vd JNINNV7d SEV6666109 To:bT b00Z/oZ/ZT I. II. LITTLE ROCK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTE RECORD Thursday, February 10, 2005 Roll Call and Finding a Quorum A Quorum was present being three (3) in number Members Present: Members Absent: City Attorney: Staff Present: Wesley Walls Marshall Peters Wyatt Weems Terrance Bolden Deborah Weldon Tony Bozynski Brian Minyard III. Approval of the Minutes of the December 2, 2004 and the January 6, 2005 minutes of the Little Rock Historic District Commission. The minutes were approved as presented. Commissioner Wesley Walls made a motion to approve both sets of minutes and Commissioner Wyatt Weems seconded. The motion was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 vacant position. IV. Finding of compliance with Notice requirements of all Subjects The applicant for 504 East Sixth Street was asked to produce the mail receipts by Staff. The applicant then made a phone call to have the certificates delivered. V. New Certificates of Appropriateness A motion was made to amend the agenda by Commissioner Weems to vote on 420 East Ninth Street before hearing 504 East Sixth Street. Commissioner Walls seconded. The motion was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 vacant position. Item V b: 420 East Ninth Street A motion was made by Commissioner Walls to withdraw the application without prejudice and was seconded by Commissioner Weems. The motion was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 vacant position. Commissioner Marshall Peters asked about the rental sign being up on the property. He stated that it was permanently affixed. Tony Bozynski, Planning and Development Director, stated that Staff would check into it, both guidelines and sign ordinance and if it was a violation, a notice would be issued. A recess of ten minutes was taken to allow time for the 504 East 6th Street notices to arrive. At this time, the certificates for 504 East Sixth Street were not available for inspection. Another motion was made to amend the agenda by Commissioner Weems to move the hearing of 504 East Sixth Street to the end of the agenda. Commissioner Walls seconded. The motion was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 vacant position. VII. Other Matters Item VII a. Multiple Commission Meeting Boyd Maher of the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program made the presentation that summarized the events of the meeting as stated in the agenda package. Brian Minyard, City Staff, stated that there was a meeting set up with Myra Jones, liaison of the Little Rock Realtors Association, for next week as part of the implementation of the meeting. Also, checking on the Realtor.com website was under way. Commissioner Peters was concerned that the AREC (Arkansas Real Estate Commission) should be a key player in the education of realtors in their continuing education process. ItemVII b: Revised Design Guideline Book Mr. Minyard stated that he had received a bibliography for the guideline book from Carolyn Newbern. It was also noted that the Commission would need to vote on the final draft of the guidelines when finished and content approved by the commission. The commissioners were concerned that the latest changes would be included in the draft. Commissioner Walls stated that he had the photographic images on his laptop and would show the commissioners the progress of the photos after the meeting. Commissioner Walls stated that the goal was to have the photography complete by the end of the month for staff coordination to insert into the guidelines book. Carolyn Newbern asked if Staff had the graphics for the "column" to be placed on the cover. (The column design is the logo used for the Little Rock Historic District signage.) Mr. Minyard said that Staff did have the original and that it could be scanned and placed on the cover. Carolyn Newbern wanted the article titled Historic Commission Realigns with Planning De artment that was in the February 2005 issue of the Chronicle to be included in the minutes. She also handed out membership applications to commission members and staff that were not current members of the Quapaw Quarter Association. Item Vb: 504 East Sixth Street Ms. Deborah Weldon, of the City Attorney's office stated that the notices were complete. Commissioner Peters advised the applicant that with three commissioners present, that they could ask for a deferral if they wished. The motion would require all three of the commissioners present in order to pass. The applicant stated that they would like to proceed with the item. Commissioner Peters made a disclosure that he been in real estate transactions with the applicant prior to this. He stated that he has no financial interest in the property at this time. Mr. Minyard, Staff, made a brief presentation of the item. He stated the original application is different than the application before the commissioners today. The original application included replacing the windows, removing shutters, painting the exterior of the building, construction of a parking lot in the rear with landscaping and a six foot fence surrounding the property with a security gate. He stated the staff recommendation of denial as filed but elaborated on the six conditions that would have to be met in order for staff to approve the COA. When covering the six conditions, the applicant's architect, John Jarrard, stated that the windows will not be replaced, they will be repaired. The shutters will be removed and Frita Tarido, owner of the property, stated that her crew would repoint the brick if necessary to repair after the shutters are removed. Mr. Jarrard stated the parking lot would be of concrete and landscaped to city code. He stated that he would check with Bob Brown of the City to verify the requirements. Mr. Minyard stated the fence that was shown on the plans that the commission received at the hearing was different than the application. After questions and discussion, the following was disclosed to the commission: The fence at the south east corner of the building that is approximately seven and one-half feet long will be a 6' tall dog-ear picket to be stained or painted to match the proposed fence at the Rainwater Flats development. It will have a gate in the fence. Rainwater Flats Development will fence the eastern and northern boundary of the site. The wood fence at the northeast corner of the building will be offset 3' from the building edge and also be 6' in height dog-ear wood fence. The existing short brick wall will be left undisturbed. The western property line will have the same 6' fence from the northwest corner of the property to the corner of the adjacent structure to the west. (The wood fence would be offset from the brick wall of Trapnall Hall.) At that point, an iron fence will be placed on the property line and extend approximately three quarters of the way toward the front of the building. Mr. Jarrard said that the gate was placed at the point in order to allow the gate to swing in, the placement of the windows, and clearance of the porch area. The gate is twelve feet wide and swings against the building. Mr. Bozynski asked if you could stack a car in the area before the gate opens. The answer was yes. Commissioner Walls stated that he understood the gate placement. Commissioner Peters asked if he was going to raise the sidewalk. Mr. Jarrard stated that at this time there had not been a grading study of the site and the he did not know at this time. Mr. Jarrard further stated that the fence did screen the air conditioning units from the street. The trash cans will be placed in the rear of the building. The side porch is the entry for three of the units, with the front door only serving one residence. Commissioner Peters asked about the elevational difference with the sidewalk and the drive on the west side of the building. He continued to ask if the concrete was going to be raised and the potential for accidents. Mr. Minyard asked for details of the side entry porch. Mr. Jarrard stated that it had to be brought up to code. The brackets were too low for clearance. He continued that with it being the entrance for three of the units, that it should be more gracious. He said that the porch will have a turned metal roof on it to match the roof on the front and it will be painted to match. The columns are similar to the ones on the front. John Greer, representing the Department of Heritage, which manages Trapnall Hall, had two points to raise. The first point was that Trapnall Hall hosts outdoor parties in the rear and the appearance of the fence would be important. He asked of Mr. Jarrard, which way the fence would face. Mr. Jarrard stated that the ordinance required him to place the finished side of the fence toward Trapnall and the rails and posts would face the parking lot. The second point was that the old structure that used to be there actually acted as a retaining wall to. hold up the soil for the backyard of Trapnall. He continued that there is a brick wall that is cracked and would be coming down. He was concerned that the two -foot change in elevation between the lots would create problems in the future and wanted an answer from the applicant about how the applicant proposed to solve it. There was discussion and Staff produced pictures showing the conditions with the Trapnall Hall property being about two feet higher in elevation over the existing parking lot elevation. Mr. Greer stated that he thought that there should be a retaining wall and if the commission really wanted a concrete retaining wall, or a brick retaining wall, etc. When the old building was removed, in essence, a retaining wall was removed. Ms. Tirado stated that she would install the fence as shown on the drawings inside her property line. Commissioner Walls asked how high the fence was going to be. She answered that the fence would be six feet in height and be installed along the ground. A discussion arose among the commissioners about approving the application conditionally concerning the retaining wall. If a retaining wall were going to be built, Staff would have to sign off on the specifications of the wall. Ms. Tirado asked that if the Rainwater Flats fence changed, hypothetically, would that change her application. The discussion ended that the fence at Caroline Apartments would need to match the Rainwater Flats fence. A motion was made by Commissioner Walls to approve the application as submitted with staff recommendations of 1,2 3,5 and 6 and that Staff approve of any retaining wall fence variations on the west wall. Commissioner Weems 1 seconded the motion. The motion was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 vacant position. A motion was made to adjourn at 6:25. o� UT TlE City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Historic L� 723 West Markham Street District = v.; Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Commission co_:V.- Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 STAFF REPORT DATE: February 10, 2005 APPLICANT: Silas Valdez ADDRESS: 504East Sixth Street, Little Rock, AR 72202 The applicant wishes to replace existing windows, eliminate existing shutters, COA REQUEST: construct a parking area with required landscaping, and construct a fence surrounding the property. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 504 East Sixth Street. The property's legal description is "Part of Trapnell_ Block in Stevenson's Addition to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas: described as: Beginning on the North line east of 6th Street at a point which is 260 feet West of the centerline of Sherman Street; run thence West on the said North line of East 6th Street a distance of 60 feet; then North at right angles 124 feet; thence East at right angles 60 feet; then South 124 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPT a strip off the east side 1 Meet wide." The house is a c 1920's Craftsman style apartment house that is considered a "Contributing Structure" to the MacArthur Park Historic District. The Craftsman style became the most common architectural style in America in the early -part of the 20th century and often coupled with the Bungalow House type. Craftsman Bungalows are characterized by irregular plans with low-pitched gable or hipped roofs, often with shed dormers. Windows are double hung -sash with three or more vertical lights in the top sash and a single light bottom sash. In many examples, rafter ends and knee braces are visible below. This property has definite Craftsman characteristics because of the time period in which it was built, the side porch design and overhang, and the wide roof eaves that expose the knee braces. The Caroline apartments at 504 E. 6" Street. ANALYSIS: There are several criteria related to this case in the District's guidelines. The Windows Design Guideline outlines seven guidelines, six which are directly related to this case. A, C, D, E, F, and G. A. Windows should be preserved in their original location, size and design, and with their original materials and number of panes. B. Windows should not be added to primary facades or to secondary facades where visible. C. Windows should be repaired rather than replaced, but if replacement is necessary due to severe deterioration, the replacement should be in -kind to match the originals in material and design. D. Windows should not have snap on or flush muntins. E. Windows screens and/or storms should be wood or baked on or anodized aluminum and fit within the windows frames, not overlap the window frames. F. Windows should not have shutters unless the building originally had them, the shutters are of louvered wood construction, and the shutters fit the window opening (so that if closed, they will cover the window opening). G. Windows should not have security bars where visible from the street. In this case the applicant wishes to replace existing windows with new vinyl windows. The Design guidelines state that windows should be repaired rather than replaced. In the case that they are replaced they should be of like materials. The applicant's proposed vinyl windows will not be compatible with the overall character of the neighborhood. Vinyl replacement windows typically differ in their proportions and dimensions from traditional wood windows and can distort the appearance of the house. The applicant has suggested that the new windows will be of the same size and should not pose a significant change in their appearance. Staff feels that even if they are the same size, the windows will look significantly different because the vinyl material is weaker than the traditional wood material and will require additional area to support the window glass, which will harm the overall character of the building. Vinyl windows also can be deformed by excessive heat and exposure to sunlight as well as other vinyl window elements like foam insulation materials. Furthermore, the addition of any window besides wood will most likely result in snap in or flush muntins, which is not desired. Staff suggests that the applicant repair the existing windows or replace them with similar wood windows to preserve the integrity of the building and surrounding district. The Shutters Design Guidelines outline two guidelines, all of which are directly related to this case. A. Shutters should not be added unless the building originally had them, the shutters are of louvered wood construction, and the shutters will fit the window opening (so that if closed, they will cover the window opening). B. Also graphic examples are included: No- Undersized ShiAters IB_ No- Undersized hutters EI No- Undersized Shutters C-13 �I k No- Undersized Shutters � .�µ The applicant has indicated that he would like to remove the shutters from the building. Staff has no objections to the shutter removal because they are under -sized shutters and were not part of the orig-inal design of the building. Staff feels that removal should be done carefully as to not damage the brick or mortar behind the shutters, or damage the windows. The Parking Design Guidelines outline four guidelines, three which are directly related to this case: B, C, and D. A. Parking lots should not be located in the front yards of houses. B. Parking lots should be gravel or smooth concrete instead of asphalt, aggregate, or brick for houses. C. Parking lots should be screened through planting of hedges, shrubs, trees, or fences at edges and in medians within. D. For commercially used houses, churches, apartment buildings, or schools should be located in rear yards if possible, but when necessary in a side yard, and should be located no closer than the front facade of the structure. The applicant has indicated a rear r-r. ' `4 pparking area with access off of East g t Sixth Street. Currently the driveway - --_ - is constructed of asphalt material j- - and is sinking and cracking. Staff feels that a parking area in the rear is appropriate and that landscaping should meet the requirements - - detailed for parking areas and/or _- other city ordinances, whichever is more stringent. Within the Historic - District asphalt parking lots are . It highly discouraged. The rear parking area should be constructed ..... out of concrete to comply with the The current driveway is not built to historic district standards Design Guidelines. Staff also feels and is in need of repair. that the driveway should be replaced with concrete to be consistent with the rear parking lot and preserve the character of the historic district. The Fences Design Guidelines outlines two guidelines related to this case: D and E. D. Fences of wood pickets may be located in front or rear yards, generally following property lines, and should be painted or stained light, pale white, or beige tones; to be no taller than three feet; have pickets no wider than three inches; and a design which is compatible with and proportionate to the house. E. Fences of wood boards for privacy should be located in rear yards; generally no taller than six feet; set back from the front facade (wall plane) if the structure at least half -way back from the front to the back walls; of flat boards in a single row (not stockade or shadowbox); stained or painted to blend with the structure; and of a design compatible with the structure. The applicant has not submitted a detailed fencing plan to accompany this application. He has indicated six-foot wooden fence that would surround the property. This six foot wooden fence would have a security gate at the entrance to the driveway. The guidelines allow six-foot fences in the rear of the property and alongside the property lines. A six- foot wooden fence could be allowable at the rear of the building and alongside the east and west property lines as long as it ended midway between the front to the back walls of the building. Staff does not feel that a six foot wooden gate, or a six foot fence fronting East Sixth Street would be appropriate. Furthermore, Staff has concerns regarding how the placement of a fence on the western edge of the property and how it will affect access to the adjacent property. The recommendations state that front fences should be constructed of pickets no higher than three feet, stained light, and painted a pale white or beige color. The guidelines do not specifically address security gates, however, gates should respect the integrity of the historic district. A brick wall and gate exists at the northeast corner of the building and should be preserved. The applicant has indicated that four garbage collectors will be located adjacent to the western side of the building, south of the side entrance. The design guidelines state that garbage units should be located in the rear of the building and screened from view with fencing or shrubbery. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no comments regarding this application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the application as presented. However, Staff would recommend approval under the following conditions: I .} That existing windows be repaired rather than replaced, if replaced, `J they are of like material and similar to the original design. Also during repair or replacement that exterior brickwork or ledges are not damaged. l=J Removal of the shutters is permitted as long as damage is not caused to the building exterior and repairs are made to the mortar and brick the to which the shutters were fastened. The construction of the parking area and access is of smooth concrete, designed to city code, and landscaped per parking lot requirements. 4. The six foot fence follows the rear and east side property lines not to exceed the midway point of the buildings front and rear. Staff recommends that a six fence on the western edge of the property should only be alongside the parking area and meet up with the security gate. That any front fence along any part of East Sixth Street be a maximum of three feet and constructed of pickets of a craftsman style. That the brick wall and gate at the northeast edge of the building be preserved and or repaired. That the security gate is located at the northwest corner of the building to mirror the existing brick wall at the northeast corner and is constructed of either iron or wood. Plans for the security gate will have to be submitted to staff for final approval by the Commission. 5. That any trash receptacles be located in the rear of the property or screened from view from the street. Plans for screening will have to be submitted to staff for final approval by the Commission. Any plans for air conditioning units are submitted to Staff for review and must not be readily visible from the street and should be screened with shrubbery and fencing. Any window air conditioning units should be located on the north fagade ONLY and should not result in the replacement or removal of the original sash. Bloom, Charles To: Historic District Commissioners Cc: Weldon, Debra Subject: Caroline Apartments -Paint Historic District Commission Members and other interested parties. We are going to drop all activity against the Caroline Apartments for applying paint to the exterior building for the following reasons: 1. On the initial application (February 10) the paint request was crossed out and not initialed. It cannot be proven that the applicant crossed it out. 2. The Staff Report does not mention that the paint portion was removed from the application. 3. The Minute Record does not mention anything about "not painting" or "painting" brick. 4. The audio cassette from the hearing does not state anything regarding the painting of the brick. Staff regrets that the only action we can take is "No Action." Unfortunately, that application was in the early months of Preservation back in our department. We will learn from this and ensure that this will not happen again. Charles Charles Bloom Planner I City of Little Rock Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 371-4483 - Fax: (501) 399-3435 Bloom, Charles From: Bloom, Charles Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 8:23 AM To: 'john jarrard'; Frieda Tirado Subject: RE: Caroline Flats This is a copy of what -we now have in our file pertaining to 504 E 6th Street: "Historic District Commission Members and other interested parties. We are going to drop all activity against the Caroline Apartments for applying paint to the exterior building for the following reasons: 1. On the initial application (February 10) the paint request was crossed out and not initialed. It cannot be proven that the applicant crossed it out. 2. The Staff Report does not mention that the paint portion was removed from the application. 3. The Minute Record does not mention anything about "not painting" or "painting" brick. 4. The audio cassette from the hearing does not state anything regarding the painting of the brick." I apologize for any confusion or frustration this may have caused. I look forward to seeing you all in October. Charles Charles Bloom Planner II City of Little Rock Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 371-4483 - Fax: (501) 399-3435 Charles, I did not receive the e-mail outlining the resolution of the paint issue. I am leaving this morning and will be back on 19 September. I may not have access to e-mail. Would you please send Frieda Tirado as copy of your e-mail also. Her address is as above. Thanks, John 1 City of Little Rock Dopartment of planning and DevelopmentPlanning Zoning and 723 West Markham Subdivision Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 (501) 371-4790 FAX ,COVER SHEET DATE: TO: L1 COMPANY: FAX NUMBER: PHONE NUMBER: FROM: DIVISION: FAX NUMBER: 501) 399-3435 PHONE NUMBER: (501)� I L( -7 I TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET: COMMENTS -V c,,,,, bc, r, t_. [tom 4� ee�w r� r 5 TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 06/03/2005 15:50 DATE DIME 06I03 15:49 FAX NO./NAME 93754249 AGES) RATION 00: 00: 38 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD P.01 f M TRANSMITTAL - TO: BRYAN MENYARD CLIP OF LITTLE ROCK Cc.: JOHN GUER FROM: JOHN JARRARD DATE: 3 .JUNE 2005 RE: CAROLINE FLATS 504 WT 6TH. STREET MEMO: FOLLOWING ARE TWO DRA.WLNGS SHOWING THE PL4NNE.D RETAINING WALL AT THE NORTH WEST PORTION OF THE PARKING LOT. PLEASE CALL IF YOU: IL4VE QUESTIONS - 375-4249. JOHN NUMBER OF WAGES (INCLUDING COVER): 3 P.02 - PROPERTY LINE 3AR .AT 24" O.C. - TO FOOTING STEEL CK WALL PAVEMENT 10" CONC FOOTING 3 - #3 REBAR CONTINUOUR WITH #2 TIES AT IV Q.C. i } wq mC) Er a� y 2Q U � 4 L,J" W 1 Ir w f � a 0w � oJw � wJz W 1 z<3 z 1 1 a z 1 0 � t a V W m y t w c 1 _ LL z c� I _ _ =x jX P.03 ac F- s¢ LLw clU it 0 ro� I� I � a_ z0 -j J c i u 04 '- ✓ EXISTING TSRICK N FENCE Oz - NEW 2' RETAINING MALL �- 0wrt 3: 4 wUJ U! U m6w r PARTIAL SITE PLAN SCALE:1"=1U-03' P.01 e.II'P Lr-. RUCK, ARXA.NSAS 72M- TO: BRIAN MINYARJ) CCFY OF LUrrLE ROCK FROM: JOHN JARRARD DATE: 3 JUNE 2005 RE: CAROLINE FLATS 504 EAST GTH. STREET MEMO: BRIAN, THE S" BRICK WALL WILL MATCH THE BRICK OF THE RECEINTLY COMPLETED, ADJACENT WALL LOCATED BETWEEN THE RAINWATER FLATS AND TRAPNAL HALL. JOHN NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER): I