Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-09-13 1046 CHNI meeting staff notes1 Ratzlaff, Hannah K. From:Ratzlaff, Hannah K. Sent:Tuesday, September 13, 2022 10:46 AM To:Malone, Walter Subject:RE: CHNI Meeting Notes Sounds good thanks! From: Malone, Walter <WMalone@littlerock.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 10:41 AM To: Ratzlaff, Hannah K. <hratzlaff@littlerock.gov> Subject: RE: CHNI Meeting Notes By using an abstract company, the applicant/owner is protected and we are protected as to who gets notified. Some cities in other states may do the notice but then if someone complains it is on us. So, we would need to talk with Jamie before making the change. HDC copied what we were already doing for PC and BOA notices. Talk with Tracy about how enforcement on Trees is done. Talk with Kevin Howard about the Deletion letter wording and if they would be open to wording changes. Staff and the HDC should talk about a framework for the guidelines including on getting local representation to help with feedback and guidance for their development. Walter From: Ratzlaff, Hannah K. <hratzlaff@littlerock.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 10:32 AM To: Malone, Walter <WMalone@littlerock.gov> Subject: CHNI Meeting Notes Walter, I met with the Central High Neighborhood Inc. last Thursday and it was a very productive and positive meeting. The association voted to provide a letter of support for the LOD proposal. During the meeting, they had several requests/suggestions concerning the future district:  Licensed Abstractor: The association voiced that they would like a less expensive alterative to using a licensed abstractor for public notice addresses. The abstractor usually costs anywhere from $300-$1,000. It isn’t stated in our by-laws or ordinance that it is necessary to use an abstractor but it is state in our application packet. o Solution: I’ve talked with Mark about making an automatic tool to grab addresses within a 200-foot radius of an address point. He said this was possible and he could develop it. The only issue is that it might not return new addresses for address changes in the past two months due to how we get the data from the county assessor. We could provide two options to applicants: #1 provide the addresses from a licensed abstractor, #2 use the list of addresses provided by HDC staff and send duplicate letters to the property address if the mailing address is different than the property addresses. o Do applications for the PC and BoD have to use a licensed abstractor? 2  Tree Preservation: The association is concerned about tree preservation in the district. Requirements outlined in the existing DOD concerning tree preservation and planting are suggested to be included in the future design guidelines for the whole district. o They asked what the process was for enforcing on owners/renters who cut down the trees in the road verge that were planted by the city or by the NA initiatives. It’s been a problem.  Demolition Letters: The association shared that the notice letters from Housing for deteriorated structures was threatening and misleading and the language led to unnecessary demolitions by worried property owners. I’d like to look into these letters. Who would I reach out to in Housing?  Focused Design Guidelines: The association voiced that design guidelines should focus primarily on two goals: the preservation and increase of contributing structures to the district and to the prevention of demolition to contributing and likely contributing structures. They wished to avoid guidelines for site design like to the installation of new fencing. Thanks, Hannah Ratzlaff Urban Designer & Historic District Commission Staff Planning & Development, 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 hratzlaff@littlerock.gov 501-371-4789