The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2024-02-14 coa amendment email1 Ratzlaff, Hannah K. From:Ratzlaff, Hannah K. Sent:Wednesday, February 14, 2024 11:19 AM To:Jeremiah Russell Subject:RE: 1003 McMath Attachments:2024-01-14 COA Amendment HDC2022-026.pdf Good morning Jeremiah, Please see attached letter confirming the approval of your COA Amendment request. Instead of a new Certificate of Appropriateness, this will be just an amendment of the previously approved HDC2022-026 COA. Please include this letter in your building permit application with other HDC approval documentation. A copy of the letter will be mailed to the property owner for their records. Concerning other amendments shown on the submitted drawings: Just a reminder that a rear privacy fence was not approved in the original COA and cannot be review administratively when visible from the street. The original COA states that landscaping would be used to screen the parking area visible along 10th and the HVAC units visible from McMath. I believe during the January 2023 public hearing, the only fencing discussed was front yard fencing and that it would be applied for at a later date. Lastly, the original COA did not include approval for a front yard patio (large concrete slab). This was conceptually shown in the drawings brought to the Commission at the January 2023 meeting but, like the front yard fence, was not discussed within approval. A COA will need to be applied for regarding a front patio and fencing (front and/or rear). Patios are typically seen integrated into a porch system, covered by a porch roof with supports, and sitting on a raised foundation. A large concrete slab in the front of a structure would be out of character and is typically discouraged. As an alternative, I would recommend a central path going from the public sidewalk to the front of the central gable section and splitting there to connect to the two ground floor entrances. I’ve attached an example of a front yard site design that is more appropriate, just as a recommendation. I’m not an architect or an artist so bear with me on the technical quality of the example illustration attached. Using landscaping to create privacy and pebbled areas for seating is more favorable than a large area of paving. For an existing example, 920 Commerce Street is a good example of compatible landscaping, front yard fencing, and paving in the district with a multifamily structure. Thanks, Hannah Ratzlaff Urban Designer Planning O: 501-371-4789 hratzlaff@littlerock.gov From: Jeremiah Russell <jeremiah@roguearch.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 3:11 PM To: Ratzlaff, Hannah K. <hratzlaff@littlerock.gov> Subject: RE: 1003 McMath 2 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hannah, No apology necessary. Just wanted to be sure you had what you need. Thank you! Jeremiah Russell, AIA, NCARB, RIBA Principal Architect 300 S Spring Street, Suite 720 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 501.412.4525 Direct/Text www.roguearch.com On February 13, 2024 at 14:50:18, Ratzlaff, Hannah K. (hratzlaff@littlerock.gov) wrote: Good afternoon Jeremiah, You’ve provided everything I need for my review. I’m in and out of meetings all day today and this review is top of my list for tomorrow. Apologies for the short delay! Thanks, Hannah Ratzlaff Urban Designer Planning O: 501-371-4789 hratzlaff@littlerock.gov From: Jeremiah Russell <jeremiah@roguearch.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 1:29 PM To: Ratzlaff, Hannah K. <hratzlaff@littlerock.gov> Subject: RE: 1003 McMath CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 3 Hannah, Good afternoon. I wanted to check in and see if there is anything else you need from me for the staff approval of the changes we made to the site plan. Thank you! Jeremiah Russell, AIA, NCARB, RIBA Principal Architect 300 S Spring Street, Suite 720 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 501.412.4525 Direct/Text www.roguearch.com On February 12, 2024 at 15:08:09, Jeremiah Russell (jeremiah@roguearch.com) wrote: Hannah, This is why you get paid the big bucks. Please take a look at the attached plans and site plan and let me know if you have any other questions. Thank you. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ruprx00nnef4w40h6271z/McMath-Revised-Plans- 2024.02.12.pdf?rlkey=58x4dri5wpqgkkauazul3e61c&dl=0 Jeremiah Russell, AIA, NCARB, RIBA Principal Architect 300 S Spring Street, Suite 720 4 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 501.412.4525 Direct/Text www.roguearch.com On February 12, 2024 at 14:24:59, Ratzlaff, Hannah K. (hratzlaff@littlerock.gov) wrote: Jeremiah, You are correct. There are no minimum parking space requirements within the Urban Use zone. The only requirements to be aware of regarding parking for the site since it is within the MacArthur Park LOD are location (rear of property), access from alleyway, and screening. As long as the design remains true to these requirements, the proposed amendments—the loss of parking spaces and the extension of the building in the rear by several feet—is not an issue. You are well within the minimum 25-foot rear setback and I’m guessing your side yard setbacks aren’t changing? These seems like a good solution, especially with the available on-street parking. Thanks, Hannah Ratzlaff Urban Designer Planning O: 501-371-4789 hratzlaff@littlerock.gov From: Jeremiah Russell <jeremiah@roguearch.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 1:44 PM To: Ratzlaff, Hannah K. <hratzlaff@littlerock.gov> Subject: RE: 1003 McMath CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hannah, 5 I appreciate the update and so quickly. Would it be fair to say that if we removed one parking space to maintain the existing front setback it could still be administratively approved? Since we are not actually required to provide parking anyway? I may be able to adjust parking and the front setback to stay within the limits of what is established, but figure its worth the question anyway. Thank you! Jeremiah Russell, AIA, RIBA Principal Architect 300 S Spring Street, Suite 720 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 501.412.4525 Direct/Text www.roguearch.com On February 12, 2024 at 13:38:22, Ratzlaff, Hannah K. (hratzlaff@littlerock.gov) wrote: Good afternoon Jeremy, I’ve reviewed the Certificate of Appropriateness approved on January 6, 2023, by the Historic District Commission. The proposed front yard setback at the time of approval was 18 feet. The setback of the structure at 1001 McMath is 7.3 feet, based on a recent survey from Joe White & Associates used for the STR application. The setback of the structure at 1007 McMath is understood to be 29 feet. Remaining within the 10% variance allowed, the minimum setback would be 16.335 feet. A 14-15 foot front yard setback is not within the allowable range set by the district’s guidelines and can’t be administratively reviewed. This would require a public hearing. Unfortunately, I do not have a recent survey on record for 1007 McMath to look to. That being said, if you would like to double check the setback of the structure at 1007 McMath, you are welcome to. Staff will go out and verify the measurement as well. 6 Thanks, Hannah Ratzlaff Urban Designer Planning O: 501-371-4789 hratzlaff@littlerock.gov From: Jeremiah Russell <jeremiah@roguearch.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 10:27 AM To: Ratzlaff, Hannah K. <hratzlaff@littlerock.gov> Subject: RE: 1003 McMath CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hannah, Good morning! I left you a voicemail last week. If you could give me a call when you’re free for a minute I’ve got a quick question and update on the McMath project. Thank you! Jeremiah Russell, AIA, NCARB, RIBA Principal Architect 300 S Spring Street, Suite 720 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 501.412.4525 Direct/Text www.roguearch.com 7 On January 8, 2024 at 12:09:10, Jeremiah Russell (jeremiah@roguearch.com) wrote: Hannah, This is great news. I appreciate your feedback. I am meeting with the Client next week to review the changes and make sure we are on the same page. I should have that revised site plan to you late next week. The lot is still intended to be split. However that is not part of our scope of work. I will get with the owner and that and have him reach out to you with a timeline. Thank you again! Jeremiah Russell, AIA, RIBA Principal Architect 300 S Spring Street, Suite 720 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 501.412.4525 Direct/Text www.roguearch.com On January 3, 2024 at 16:59:47, Ratzlaff, Hannah K. (hratzlaff@littlerock.gov) wrote: Good afternoon Jeremiah, Happy New Year to you too! 8 If the proposed alteration to the previously approved design is to extend the rear of the building 3 feet and no other alterations will be made to the exterior, this scope can be administratively reviewed. You will need to submit a new site plan showing new setbacks for review to document the change. Are there still plans to split the lot? Thanks, Hannah Ratzlaff Urban Designer Planning O: 501-371-4789 hratzlaff@littlerock.gov From: Jeremiah Russell <jeremiah@roguearch.c om> Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2024 1:19 PM To: Ratzlaff, Hannah K. <hratzlaff@littlerock.gov > Subject: 1003 McMath CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 9 Hannah, Good afternoon and happy new year! I hope you had a wonderful holiday season with your family. Hard to believe it’s 2024 already. I have a quick question for you that I hope has a quick and easy answer. The owner of 1003 McMath (previous HDC application for new construction) would like to make a change to the building envelope in the rear of the building - adding about 3 feet to the rear to build out a utility closet at the rear entry of each unit to house HVAC and Water Heater. These will be secured and not accessible by the tenants, but will be located interior. Here’s the question, since we are not changing the essential exterior design (the bathroom at the rear moves out some to accommodate the closet) can this be approved at the staff level or would this trigger a new hearing with notifications? Please feel free to call me directly anytime to discuss. Thank you! 10 Jeremiah Russell, AIA, NCARB, RIBA Principal Architect 300 S Spring Street, Suite 720 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 501.412.4525 Direct/Text www.roguearch.com