Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 09-14-2015DATE: Septen APPLICANT: James ADDRESS: NEC 6 COA REQUEST: Install 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. 1. 14, 2015 as, Moses Tucker d Cumberland Streets PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at Northeast corner (NEC) 6th and Cumberland Street;. The property's legal description is "Lot 4-6. Block 40, Original City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansa ." This lot is covered by a parldng lot currently. In the 1978 survey of the area, this no build ngs were on the site. This application is to install a f nce around three sides of the Central Arkansas Water (C 4,W) property they use for parking. Also, some site ch nges will be made, 1) removing part of guardrail, rest iping the stall lines, some additional asphalt where gu rdrail was, restructuring islands, and removing three tre s. PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE: No previous actions were on t is site were located with a search of the files. � Jm��en:noi� C v+x n x Location of Project Y PROPOSAL AND WRITTEN NALYSIS OF THE APPLICATION BASED OFF OF INTENT AND GUIDELINES: The proposal is to add a six f of fence along three of the four property lines: along the Sixth Street right -of way, the alley that was not already approved through the Legion Village apartment's project, and along the north property line. The Cumberland Street frontage will not have a fence or gate at this tim a. Page 1 of 8 the Lwil,�,-�� Photo from brochure of "Classic' i Contributing and N map Plan of fence - additional fence areas The current Guidelines state th4 following about fences on page 58-9.: 3. Fences and Retainin Walls: Fen ing on street frontage & front yard--36" Rear yard fencing-72" Iron, wood, stone, or bricl fences or walls that are original to the property (at least 50 years old) should be pre erved. If missing, they may be reconstructed based on physical or pictorial evide 7ce. Sometimes a low stone or brick wall supports an iron or wooden fence. Fencing material should I a appropriate to the style and period of the building. Cast iron fences were commo through the Victorian period and should be retained and maintained. Wrought iror and bent wire fences are also historic. Fences may be located it front, side, or rear yards, generally following property lines. Fences with street fronts te should be no taller than three feet (36) tall. On wood fences, pickets should be no wider than four inches (4) and set no farther apart than three inches (3). The lesign shall be compatible with and proportionate to the Page 2 of 8 building. For larger sc+ scale of the building and Fences in the rear yards a. be 72" tall. The privacy structure at least halfway Wood board privacy fenc stockade or shadowbox), fences may be located or and should be coated c recommended. Fences should not have pictorial or physical evid( not appropriate. New retaining landscape that are in close proximii materials of the building Landscaping walls should historic walls in the night fence heights should be appropriate to the those on side property lines without street frontage may nce should be set back from the front fagade of the !tween the front and back walls of the main structure. should be made of flat boards in a single row (not d of a design compatible with the structure. Chain -link in rear yards, where not readily visible from the street, 4 green or black. Screening with plant material is stone, or concrete piers or posts unless based on Free-standing walls of brick, stone, or concrete are 911s are discouraged in front yards. Certain front yards to the sidewalk may feature new walls that match the d be consistent with historic walls in the neighborhood. latch the materials of the building and be consistent with The guidelines were revised in 2013 to add the sentence: "For larger scale properties, fence heights should be appropriate o the scale of the building and grounds." This is a three lot parcel that is a quarter of a bl)ck. Staff does not feel that this is a larger scale property as opposed to MacArthur Park, St. Edwards Church, Kramer School, Cumberland Towers, the Terry Mansion or Gracie Mansi n (Fowler Square). The cover letter states: "The p oposed fencing is viewed as an aesthetic improvement to the property and is intended to m tch the height and style of the fencing being installed by its neighbor to the east, 'Legion qow Apartments' whom also successfully applied for perimeter fencing with the MacArthur Hist ric District Commission earlier this year." South Elevation of the Legion v lage A portion of the south elevation of the Legion Apartments as approved. Village Apartments as approved by Staff in the building hermit review process. Page 3 of 8 The fence along the south ele tion of the Legion Village has been proposed to be reduced since the Commission approve( it. It is proposed to not a continual barrier along the property line as before. The center se ion has been proposed to be moved back to the face of the building, shortened, and has in affect, become a gate flush with the wall of the building. The fence shown on the right abovi has been proposed to be about five and one half feet off the ground. It is a four foot tall fe ice on top of the brick porch which sets two steps above the sidewalk. The gate to the parkii g area will be six feet tall and the gates and fencing around the dumpster will be seven feet tall iccording to ordinance. Thus the fencing on the Legion Village site will not be a uniform height om the sidewalk. The fencing associated with L gion Village that encloses the alley is for secure parking of tenant's vehicles with automai c entry gates. The entrances to the property are on the Cumberland Street side. Howe er, with no gates or fencing along Cumberland Street planned, the fence will only serve as a ross pedestrian deterrent and as the cover letter states, "an aesthetic improvement" to the pi operty. Between the Legion Village fen ing and the CAW parking lot is the convenience store and the alley. With the fencing at Le lion Village being three different heights and the separation between the fencing along 6th Street, it is less important that the fence be of uniform height. Pedestrian circulation and the esthetics of the property could be improved with a fence of a shorter height than six foot. Staff has been informed that the alley in this block is heavily traveled between the bus transit center and the convenience sic re. The Legion Village project will close the alley to foot traffic with their fencing plan. That noi th south traffic would then shift to the east along Rock Street or west to the parking lot between the Paragon Building and the police building. If the pedestrian traffic shifts west, the traffic would end up going through the parked cars of CAW and their employees, hence, the request or the fence. The guidelines state that a three foot fence should be installed. Some site changes will be ma a as part of this application: 1) removing part of guardrail, 2) restriping the stall lines, 3) s me additional asphalt where guardrail was, 4) restructuring islands, and 5) removing three trees. These changes are considered minor to the scope of work. The removing of the guardrail, restructuring the islands and the additional asphalt are under the Commissions review. The restriping of the parking stall lines and the removing of the trees are not. The removing of the guardrail s necessary for internal circulation in the parking lot since the alley will not be used for an aisle after the fence is installed that is part of the Legion Village project. The restriping is also part of the reorganization of the parking lot to allow for internal circulation. The parking surfacl is asphalt now, the proposed paving and creation of islands will result in a net gain of asphalt o a single digit percentage. This is not a particularly large r ece of property and is not the scale of property envisioned when the Commission changed its uidelines as to fence height. With the property remaining a parking lot for the long term, e I of the fencing will be viewable to the public. The fencing will match the Legion Village in sty a but not in height, since Legion Village fencing varies in height. There is physical separation o the fencing between the properties when viewed by the public from the 6th Street. With no lates or access controls on Cumberland Street, this will not be secured parking for the CAW r their employee's vehicles. Therefore, Staff believes a six foot Page 4 of 8 fence is not necessary to acl propose that a four foot fence NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS comments regarding this applica STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Reduce the height of the 2. Obtaining a building perr the height of the fence that was height of fences along 6th Street the goals of the cover letter or this application. Staff would d suffice to serve the goals of the applicant. REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no with the following conditions: i fence to four feet in height. stion on the item. Chair Toni Johnson asked a question on wed at Legion Village. Mr. Minyard explained the different the break in the fence with the store building and the alley. Jimmy Moses, speaking for the plicant, spoke of the building that is occurring on the east side of the block and the renovation of the legion building. He said that the fence was reactionary to the pedestrian traffic today. Th may come back at a later time with a request for a gate, but not at this time. Mr. Moses said that the higher fence would help prevent people from jumping over the fence. Commissioner Rebecca Faker a ked if it was difficult to jump over a four foot fence. Mr. Moses responded that it has spikes, 14A it was easier to jump over a four than a five foot fence. Commissioner Jeremiah Russell Psked why when eighty foot of the border was open. Commissioner Dick Kelley asked about the future plans for the fence. Mr. Moses said that CAW had debated the issue and is not sure if they will enclose the Cumberland side in the future. He described the block and trying lo do the right thing for the neighborhood. He described a pedestrian problem that is not lil<4 the rest of the neighborhood. There was a discussion on how fences along 6th Street again for Commissioner Page Wilson ask drawing from staff were small. I He asked about the design of th There was a discussion on the color copies of the fence given I staff report, there is a cut sheet Village fence exactly. Commi corners. Mr. Moses said that he through Subdivision Committee. Low Impact Development (LID) strategy. There were no citizens that Commissioner Wilson asked if Central Arkansas Water and cu i the fence was. Mr. Minyard described the heights of the commissioners. d about the design of the previous fence. He stated that the Ir. Moses agreed with him that the fence was more aesthetic. fence and being unable to determine it from the staff report. ibmittals of the fence. Mr. Minyard stated that there were full the commissioners in their packets that were mailed. In the >f the fencing with the details on it. This matches the Legion sioner Wilson asked if CAW was going to fence all of the did not know. Commissioner Wilson asked if the project went Mr. Moses said no. Commissioner Wilson commented on a meeting and questioned why they did not explore any LID to speak on the item. had a Conflict of Interest because he signs contracts with Illy has a contract with them. Debra Weldon asked him if he Page 5 of 8 has any financial interest in the Dutcome of this COA. He replied no. She responded that was the measure. Mr. Minyard stated the applicaf n as applied for was a six foot fence. The applicant has not amended his application. He ci ntinued that if the motion was "as submitted", the Commission was voting on a six foot fence Chair Johnson asked if the applicant wanted to amend his application. Mr. Moses wanted to keep a six foot fence on the application. Mr. Moses stated that this will match the other fen a on the other project. Commissioner Russell stated t t it was not a security issue, but an aesthetic issue. Four feet is too tall in his opinion, but woi Id go along with Staff on that recommendation. Commissioner Russell thinks that three feet wil provide a barrier to pedestrians. Commissioner Johnson thinks I hat Cumberland Street will be gated at some time. Mr. Moses stated that he cannot say whett er they will do it or not. He did say that three or four feet did not do what they wanted, but it doei match the fence to the east. Commissioner Russell comme ted that he thought that the items were to be reviewed as presented, not as they might a in the future. If it is a security fence, they should have submitted with a gate. The Cor imission must look at what is there. There was a discussion on what the guidelines say and pro erty rights. Chair Toni Johnson noted the ence next to it almost the same height. Visually, she believes them to be the same height. Cc nmissioner Russell stated that they were broken up. Commissioner Pekar asked a Dout the security gate between the deli and the apartment building. Mr. Minyard explainec that there are two vehicular security gates on 6th Street for the apartment building. Commissioner Wilson asked if the commissioners could express their thoughts without saying yes or no. Ms. Weldon stated at the Commission could not take a poll. Commissioner Wilson stated that he was fine with the ence and that fences are arbitrary in their approval. Commissioner Wilson made a seconded and the motion pass tion to approve the fence as submitted. Commissioner Kelley with a vote of 6 ayes and 1 no (Russell). Page 6 of 8 DEPARTMENT Of PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72ZOI-1334 Phone: (501137 1 -4 790 Faz:(SOD 399-3435 APPLICATION FOR A CERTI ICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS t. Application Date: A alit 7, 2015 2. Date of Public Hearing:. September 15 2015 _ _ - at 5 00 p m. 3. Address of Proinarty: NEC of all 51 & Cumeedand St. 4. Legal Description of Prop rty:_ Original City of LHee Rock. Block 40. Let 4-6, Laae Beck. Pulaski, AN 5, Property Owner (Printed I lame, Address, Phone, Emaip; Central Apemnaa Water 6, Owner's Agent: (Printed t ame, Addreae, Phone. Emaip: James as z°° a rer Near l Ave astir. Llek Rool 72el Small JAMOSESOMOSESTUOKER.COM _. __. _ _ mslNl OaCP'alry rMlal f n _ 7. Brief Project DesCription'. a rig elwg ywey tl E r penm of anew pe 'n�A w T con a prig so�ppedy 1-e aionAatn S)teei _ nv lmflLAm SWC of,oer g beam, scamtl at'311 rE. Ell west to CumbanenJ el S. Estimated Cost of lmpro merits:_. --- 9. Zoning Classification: Is t fe proposed change a permitted use? Yes `No- f O.Signature of Owner orAS nt. —42— _ --.- fTLepwnerwlllneedrp rhorize any Aghm'.,, .m represenfirg the owner ar the public heanrq) NOTE: Should there be chant as during construction Idesgnmaterials, size, etc.) from the approved COA. applicant shall notify Cbmmiss on man and are appropriate actions. Approval by the Commission doss not excuse apPOcanl or property tom compliance with other applicable codes, oemances or policies or the city unless stated by free Cornmixs n or start. neaponm i for Idenllfying —h codex. mJlnm,ws, or pol¢me rota win, in. apWkam, ownero m. (ills section on to be c0mpletetl by staff), Little Rock Historic District C mmie5lon Action - Denied _ W hhdrawn _ pproved _ Approved with Conditions _ See Attached Conditions Revise 82012 Page 7 of 8 2 MOSI,S T LIl Mr. Brian MNyerd MxArtbur Part Nbtork Dertrkt "11. Marseilles, Letter Rock, All 72201 August 21. 2015 al. Applicatmntor (iRmOR o Mpropnemnew oral AB Water -Parkin& I t G Amster fe n[i ng Dearadan Ple— find e,closea our applkatWn I r me Protected rmprovemenn m'be "'face BarNry or "once by Cent" Arkansas Waty ICAWl located al the ultunal shot Bit & Underline Streets. The proper, is within Me MxARhu' boners, District and currently, It used by CAW ampby es and fleet yebl[lefo' parking to support lts operation at this location CAW Would lee to oral the '.IWWII mprmamerns to the Woperty Primarilyforthex far, and secu0ty of its emPleyees and voody", ftell arch, Ppproxlrru Y55'I alone a Mrtmn of the alleyway bordering the east property bre running so to to the coos, 11, lopled at 61n Street • Install ba ln8lappmdeM y fill f all the propertyiley belle es, she flerani.ol,cruid elleres, and running well he pmpep lone at Combed no Street • Install fencing(approahnat y90'I along the property Lne beginning at the south west comer of the Paragon dual lit t E. Capital assi nuir west in a point al the prepeM line on f nhdaland 5crret • CAW imends or remove let is Of of tMneen f3)1hies on his property along 11 east"cous, Lne so allow for mproved circulation wl rinthe parking lot CAW does not intend to no all access control or mechonlaed vshrculx gins at the Cumberland Street enVanm/an • Fencing Details; Amemtar tortage(Classlcl. 6tall, book(loseenclosed bKKhutel The rucel fentlne is viewed u .1 lusurei reel—onenno she 1-11ord11 intended to match brae layehbnd sMe of the le'rting bBngmstalled by as net occur tonne east, thou Sow Apartments whom alw wlcessrully applied lm penmeter Rs all We aVPrecglP in,'r sncerery, '—e Moses 11 a.Bohanan/CAW son and support olthe?W,ning De W rtment and are stalaEle to insurer any pueAi y's ! the aps,_ose, Ica the p.npi h• an imFin. m anrlannear and m "del Ica your Page 8 of 8 625'sq x Up PICKM I •93V x 1.25' x Up PAILS I YsA 11593 POSTS Exn'. ra premed ^alNO al eKR rill mli.-vrwrame "I he"', _. reni"o .',mm i MU PPEIPNS •a•�• • • �J CLASS/C' MANS2IC' PfNESIS- CNfSCENE" A. I..derk le hu'. M Awq 13-1I1'1- sli..ry All Montage term pamels are fabncand using kwstar s Profusion welding process. This technique combines laser .1 j fusion txhnology to Mae a vlMalM lnvimbM stn[tunl connection at awry, Piero tomidelosenum Unliktyplcalaluminumfenpesystemsthatam MldWge mthunmghtNxmers, ReProl'usimi used with Montage pmmhtesa"goodnaighbn" profile with sleeglircesaM mentioned wa, sue+•` pi to rat fast ners when compared to aluminum tenang, Montage's mned steel construction is unmatched in stin nglh and durability. E-COAT `PRCAPEFlNISN E-COAT'Jan -.. ®I steelharFINISH lgMen to mold -stage pmtRetmenGWash lwithnrx.'ymsPha2) fdbwetl M a du mthodrc OeCho at system mnvsting of an epxy pima. sMich slgnAreanth mcni '� mnosinr NMect and an a.,Am Nlxoal, which Amides the protection n'lPSsaly tp withstand adAcru wealhAmng edmt Thrs ponssrewds In years dmalMmancnlreeaareship. 20 YEAR I /Ml rED WARRANTY The Montage fair ies of fencing products are manufactured from superur Quality maimed by squiled ' clansmen wnh he highest standards ut walvnallshrp III the Industry. Mnmatm b conneem in offering MrIntagr with a 20 year limited womanly, ®MADE DOMESTIC M NUFACFUR/" IllUpyg Amenstor is co mined to pmvlding pmducti that are manufactured in the USA. Wehavemade JM significant inv nimend, m tumnormly, pmeessimprowment and employee Veining In an effort to secure Ami jobs and canal( mferiw imps( puff Broohure— Page 9 of 8 Bawl xtw®asaasa