Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemos, emails, and fax pertaining to 514 E. 9th St.08/24/99 TUE 05:37 FAX 501+851+9659 R KENNEDY" 444 Anne Guthrie [M 001 Facsimile Cover Sheet To: Company: Phone: Fax: From: Company: Phone: Fax: Date: Pages including this cover page: Comments: Anne, Anne Guthrie Little Rock Historic District 244-5420 399-3461 Bob Kennedy Bob Kennedy 851-7996 601-861-7962 8/24/99 7:39am 1 This fall I'd like to do some landscaping at 614 E. 9th St; do you need a diagram or just a description of what I want to do? I'd like to put 3 or 4 small bushes out front and cover the area with bark chips. I also plan to put crushed rock on the west side of the house to assist with drainage. Thanks, Bob Kennedy 4 '�� RL&St�t- City of Little Rock Department of Housing & Neighborhood Programs Administration 615 West Markham, Suite 100, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Phone 501-371-4748, Fax 501-399-3461 Bob Kennedy 100 Edgewood, #2624 Maumelle, AR 72113 Subject: 514 East Nine Street Dear Bob, 3 May 1999 On behalf of the Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC), I am writing to notify you that the work on the front porch at 514 East 9th Street does not comply with the drawings that were submitted and approved on December 1998. As part of your application request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA), the plans were an essential aspect of the LRHDC's approval. The railing spindles are not spaced appropriately and are not the shape or configuration as drawn and subsequently approved in your COA application. Other rehab details that are a concern to the LRHDC are: removal of the gutters may result in poor drainage and damage to the foundation; the front porch fascia has been altered considerably; the front porch's skirt is not the same width and profile as the original; and compliance with the facade easement regulations that the state historic preservation office has on this structure. As part of the COA process, you are requested to write a letter within seven (7) days of receipt of this correspondence, stating the reasons why the plans were altered or appear before the LRHDC at its next meeting in June to defend the action of not installing the railings and balustrade according to plans and specifications. As stated in the city ordinance, a fine up to $500 may be incurred for non-compliance with the approved architectural plans. Should you have questions, please call me at 244-5420. Respectfully, Qa V. Anne Guthrie Historic Preservation Administrator xc: Little Rock Historic District Commission members Anthony Black W City of Little Rock Department of Housing & Neighborhood Programs Historic Preservation 615 West Markham, Suite 100, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 10 September 1998 Bob Kennedy 100 Edgewood, #2624 Maumelle, AR 72113 Dear On behalf of the Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC), I am writing to notify you that the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application for the rehabilitation of the two -storied apartment building at 514 East 9th Street was deferred at the 3 September 1998 meeting. It was agreed unanimously that your COA application be deferred for thirty (30) days, until the next meeting, which is 1 October 1998. A deferral allows for the development of additional information or details that the LRHDC deems necessary in order to act on the application. At the next meeting, the LRHDC will review the plans, drawings and information regarding the project scope of the structure's rehabilitation; it is the usual procedure for a deferred COA to be acted upon at the next meeting. To clarify the LRHDC actions, the following is permissible work for the subject property prior to the October meeting: 0 all rehab work on the exterior is to be discontinued; 0 a building permit will not be issued during the interim time period; 0 only the installation of the new roof may be completed, and, as agreed, with no change to the roofline; 0 interior rehab work may proceed; 0 no existing exterior material may be removed or new material added that is of a permanent nature; 0 due to complaints, the structure's yards are to be cleared of construction debris on a daily basis to ensure property safety. As discussed at the meeting and over the telephone, and, in order to ensure a decision at the next LRHDC meeting, I recommend that the following items be taken care of or addressed in some manner: 0 at the meeting, it was stated that the submitted listing of work "does not have detailed information and a more elaboration of drawings and material is needed"; LRHDC Letter to Kennedy 10 September 1998; page 2 0 as required for all work, a site plan of the property and any map of the surrounding or adjacent areas,.especially to the north; 0 historical photographs and architectural drawings to justify scope of work and specifics (i.e., windows, soffit and fascia, balconies; porch detailing for balustrade and railing, etc); 0 more elaboration of proposed work, such as structural information and architectural detailing; 0 a document presented to satisfy off-street parking requirements, area parking users and adjacent property owners (i.e., letter from zoning about parking requirements for this property or agreement with adjacent owners regarding shared parking and access to parking). It is to the applicant's benefit to have more information, materials, photographs and drawings in order to be prepared and to anticipate the questions that may be asked. These issues simply demonstrate the LRHDC's concern with a structure's exterior and helps to ensure that the quality and integrity of a structure's historic and architectural fabric remains intact; this structure is, after all, a contributing structure to the historic district and is in a prominent location. Should you have any questions about the LRHDC's decision or the upcoming meeting in October, by all means call me at 244-5420. 1 am amiable to meeting or talking with you about the process at your convenience. R spectfully, V. Anne Guthrie Historic Preservation Administrator Robert Kennedy 100 Edgewood #2624 Maumelle, AR 72113 Fax 851-9659 Home Phone 851-9658 Email kennedyr@concentric.net City Zoning Office Attn: Dana Carney Dear Mr. Carney, October 19, 1998 Per our phone conversation last week, I am providing you with the information about my property at 514 E. 9th St. here in Little Rock. I atn in the middle of repairing it, when complete it will be a 4-plex lvith 3 one bedroom / one bath apartments and my residence, a two -bedroom, 2 bath. I am enclosing a diagram of the block with individual tracts drawn that shows the relationship of my properties to adjacent properties. I have also included a portion of my survey which shows more detail of my two tracts. I plan to use the tract labeled as "I" for parking. My home is located on tract "N," so I must cross adjacent property to access mine. I am not able to park on any portion of tract "N." I am requesting a letter from your office that I can present to the historic commission that briefly states zoning requirements in general and for my property. If you have any questions, please contact me at my home phone Sincerely, Robert E. Kennedy Eno.: 2 City of Little Rock Department OTPTainning and DevelopmentPlanning Zoning and 723 West Markham Subdivision Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 (501) 371-4790 October 21, 1998 Robert Kennedy 100 Edgewood #2624 Maumelle, Arkansas 72113 Re: 514 East 91h Street Dear Mr. Kennedy: The property located at 514 East 9th Street is zoned HDR, High Density Residential. The use of this property for a four -unit apartment building is permitted. I have attached a copy of the Board of Adjustment's July 19, 1982 minutes related to this property. In those minutes, the Board recognized the existing four -unit apartment building and the off -site parking located on a nearby tract. If you have any questions, please call me at 371-6817. DC/ar otCity of Little Rock HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC) Members FROM: V. Anne Guthrie, Historic Preservation Administrator DATE: 28 August 1998 SUBJECT: Next LRHDC Meeting This serves as a reminder of the LRHDC meeting on Thursday, 3 September at 4:30 p.m., Sister Cities Conference Room, second floor of City Hall. There are three Certificates of Appropriateness (COA) applications: the first is 1000 Rock Street to rehabilitate the structure's interior and exterior; the second is 514 East 9th Street for the rehabilitation of the interior and exterior of a multi -family structure and the last application is 619 Cumberland and 618 Rock streets, which was deferred from last month's, for the construction of a 35-space parking lot. Support documents for each application are enclosed. Related to the deferred COA, please bring the materials from your last meeting packet (articles, 1983 minutes, court opinion, etc.); if you are unable to locate them, please let me know. The staff analysis for the deferred request was altered to reflect the changed plan. It is important that you inspect all three request sites, at your convenience and prior to the meeting. This meeting may be long, so please come prepared for such. Call me at 244-5420 if you have a concern or question. Enclosures xc: #ruce Moore \jTony Black Rick Purifoy Vanessa Sykes, Assistant City Clerk Sarah Brown, QQA Executive Director Missy McSwain, AHPP CLG Liaison Michael Preble, MacArthur Park Neighborhood Association President City of Little Rock HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC) Members FROM: V. Anne Guthrie, Historic Preservation Administrator DATE: 25 June 1999 SUBJECT: LRHDC Meeting &W. This is a reminder that there will be a LRHDC meeting, Thursday, 1 July at 5:00 p.m. in the Sister Cities Conference Room at City Hall. Prior to the meeting, we will meet at 4:00 p.m. at the property of 514 East 9th Street to review the plans, work and to discuss the rehabilitation items of the property with the owner and his lawyer; we will then return to City Hall to have our regularly scheduled public hearing. Should there be a change, you will be notified by phone. There is one COA application to review, the rehabilitation and renovation of apartments at 916- 924 Commerce Street. Please visit the site prior to the meeting in order to familiarize yourself with the project request and its neighborhood surroundings. Enclosed are the minutes, agenda, application, support documents and staff recommendations for your review. Also under consideration is the non-compliance of COAs for 514 East 9th and 902 Cumberland. Copies of the correspondence is enclosed for your review. The owner for the 9th Street property and the agent for the Cumberland property were asked to attend the July meeting in order to explain the work. For the Cumberland project site, their agent wrote two letters explaining the utilization of bronze windows instead of glass blocks for the north entry. Please call 244-5420 if there are questions or you are unable to attend. Enclosures xc: Margi Gant; Bruce Moore; An ny Black; Vanessa Sykes; Rick Purifoy; Mona Hughes, AHPP CLG Liaison; Sarah Brown, QQA Director; Jim Metzger, QQA Committee Chair; Michael Preble, President of the MacArthur Park Neighborhood Association Little Rock Historic District Commission 8 April 1999 Minutes, Page 2 Due to the structure's location in two overlay districts, Capitol Zoning District (CZDC) and MacArthur's, the project must be approved by both. The CZDC reviews and approves setbacks, height, use, variances, design and new construction. There was discussion regarding the structure's design, etc. Gardner made a motion to accept the staff recommendations and approve the application with conditions. Staff recommendation was to approve the garage's demolition and new construction contingent on CZDC's approval of the project, its construction, setbacks, design review, etc. The vote was unanimous to approve the COA application. Under old business, the rehabilitation project on 514 East 9th Street was raised and how the railings were not in compliance with approved drawings by the LRHDC. Progress photos were passed around for review. Greer stated that from the photos, it is evident that the finished product (railings and balustrade) does not meet the specifications of the approved plans. When asked whether they are acceptable or not, Greer stated that they are unacceptable balusters: the railings are not as drawn, are not to scale, are not proportional in spacing or size, inferior fabric was used and instead of a detailed cap on top of balustrade, a 2x10 was used because it's cheaper. It was noted that there may be problems with the portico as well. The AHPP has an easement on the structure, but they have been unsuccessful in getting in reaching the owner. It was recommended that there be a stop work order issued until an explanation is given as to why the railings were not constructed as drawn. In the same vein, Graves Litho at 900 Cumberland also did not follow the approved plans. Instead of glass blocks on the front (north) facade's entry as presented, depicted and approved, the finished product has bronze windows in the front opening as well as throughout. Staff recounted a phone conversation with Graves about why bronze windows were in place instead of the glass block. Their original rehab plan was to install aluminum windows throughout and glass blocks on the front entry only. A letter from Graves explained that one commissioner had mentioned that bronze windows would look better and they took that advice. While the issue with Graves may be more subjective, both rehab projects are instances where the applicant did not install what was presented to and approved by the LRHDC. There was discussion regarding the approval process and how to ensure that owners comply with the approved work. Greer reminded that the district's design review guidelines, page 4, states that work contrary to what was approved is subject to a fine; a fine may be levied due to non- compliance with the approved plans, changing materials or not getting LRHDC approval. A stop work order may be issued as well until the owner appears before the LRHDC. It was agreed that a letter would be sent to both stating that the LRHDC requests that the owner explain why the approved plans were not followed; the applicant may respond either by letter withing a specified time period or appear in person at the next meeting. Applicants must be held accountable for what was approved, and the issue of non-compliance is a role of city government. It was agreed that the COA application should note change of approved plans or an affidavit should be signed regarding deviation from plans. Little Rock Historic District Commission 3 June 1999 Minutes, Page 2 circa 1920s-30s garage is in poor condition and 2/3 of it is gone due to termites. The garage and rear addition are in poor condition and have been inspected by an architect, contractor and engineer. The new construction of a two -car garage has wooden siding and requires a variance for rear yard setback (it has two bays on the west elevation opening onto the alley). The subject property is in the middle of the block, and the proposed fence in the rear and side yards cannot be seen from Rock. The fence height is 8' and requires a height variance from the Board of Adjustment. Proposed roofing material for the new garage was composition shingle, but after plans were submitted, the owners decided that corrugated metal would be more appropriate. Staff recommendation was to approve the COA request with two conditions: that the variances for setbacks and fence height be approved by the ZBA and that should be the project's scope change, staff will be notified and appropriate action taken. There was a motion to approve the COA application with the amendment of the garage roofing material (changed to corrugated metal). The motion was approved unanimously. Under new and old business, the non-compliance of approved COAs was discussed, specifically for the properties at 514 East 9th and 902 Cumberland. Staff summarized the recent actions: that the requested letters for, and reviewed by, the LRHDC went out to the two property owners. A similar letter was mailed to the QQA, as they did not follow procedures for obtaining a building permit, either through administrative approval or appearing before the LRHDC. r The two owners of 514 East 9th and 902 Cumberland were asked to either write a letter explaining their actions (i.e., why they did not follow the COA and installed materials contrary to what was approved) or appear at the June meeting. Of the two, only the representative of 902 Cumberland (Graves Litho) responded; two letters were written in April and May explaining why they did not install the approved glass blocks on the north elevation's entry. Only this entry, which was being enclosed, was to have glass blocks, and the remainder were insulated bronze windows. Instead of glass blocks for the north entry, they thought the bronze windows looked better and would be more uniform and consistent. Staff talked with Graves Litho on more than one occasion and had several phone conversations with their representative regarding the installment of the windows. The representative made it clear, on more than one occasion, that the mistake was an honest one, of not knowing that he should have notified the LRHDC of the changes. He is eager to work with the LRHDC and will attend the July meeting; he could not attend in June as he had business outside the state. For 514 East 9th, the property owner called on two occasions and talked with staff. While having drawings, as requested by the LRHDC at an earlier meeting, the end product is not as drawn and has not complied with the design, scale, materials, etc. He has an obligation as owner of a historic structure in a historic district to comply with design guidelines and what was approved. Two adjacent property owners, Core and Morning were present at the meeting and were given the opportunity to address their concerns about 514 E. 9th. Core stated that his property had problems with the discarded roofing materials from the subject property on his roof; the removal of gutters from the subject property had caused drainage problems (the sideyard setbacks are close); and the issue of parking in the rear of the buildings, or in the middle of the Little Rock Historic District Commission 3 June 1999 Minutes, Page 3 block, has continued to be a problem. The front porch and its subsequent alterations and repairs (balustrade, railings, skirt, etc.) were done poorly. The state preservation program has a facade easement on the subject structure; the owner was notified by mail but has not responded (per AHPP's conversation). There was discussion of state authority with the facade easement and its enforcement capabilities. Morning's concern is that the tenants of 514 E. 9th trespass on his property on the east and in the rear of the structures, or the interior of the block. The issue of trespassing and lack of working with involved properties is a concern of the adjacent property owners. Also discussed was whether a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) was required for 514 E. 9th, since it had been vacant for over a year and it is apartments; also the question of the property complying with code was discussed. It was decided that staff, as instructed by the LRHDC, would write another letter to the owners of the two subject properties. For 514 East 9th: a stop -work order due to non-compliance with COA would be issued; have the code enforcement officer cite the owner for non-compliance; notify housing of residents, code, apartment inspection to ensure that the building has the required permits, etc. for occupancy. Regarding 902 Cumberland: the representative for Graves Litho will be written and asked to appear before LRHDC in July. There was discussion of enforcement of design, work, etc. in the historic district and compliance with approved COAs. The issue of design for historic structures is one of the LRHDC's primary responsibility. It is important that owners and applicants know the role and responsibility of the LRHDC and its parameters for review consideration. The issue of QQA not obtaining a COA or LRHDC approval for a building permit prior to work was discussed. While QQA did receive approval by the CZD for a permit in February, they did not obtain LRHDC approval. Staff had talked with the director about the process, provided a copy of the design guidelines, application, etc. for informational purposes. There were a couple of phone conversations about the process. For QQA, it is important that they set an example by following the procedures and obtaining the necessary approvals. One letter in May had been sent to QQA, but there had been no formal response, only a phone conversation with staff. Another letter, as instructed by LRHDC, should be written to QQA that requires a response. With the role that QQA plays in the neighborhood and among preservationists, it is imperative that they obtain the necessary permission and permits prior to repair or rehabilitation work. There was some discussion about the Donaghey Building on Main Street and its proposed demolition. The expiration of two commissioners' terms, that of Greer's as architect and of Marratt's as property owner, was reviewed. Greer has submitted a letter asking for reappointment, but Marratt has not decided. One commissioner's position, that of resident and property owner, is available as Gardner recently bought a new house and moved out of the historic district after last summer's fire at the Parkview condos. The condos are on the market to be sold, and there may be a closing on them in the near future. As there was no other business, the LRHDC adjourned at 6:20 p.m. City of Little Rock Department of Housing & Neighborhood Programs Administration 615 West Markham, Suite 100, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Phone 501-371-4748,Fax 501-399-3461 3 May 1999 Raymon Hill, General Manager Graves Litho Service, Inc. 215 East 9th Street Little Rock, AR 72202 Dear Raymon, On behalf of the Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC), I am writing to notify you that the rehabilitation work on the building's front facade does not comply with the approved plans that were presented at the October 1998 LRHDC meeting. According to the computerized drawings of the building's elevation, the proposal depicted the entry on the north elevation as being replaced with glass blocks; the old glass entry door and side windows would be filled in with the blocks and the front steps and sidewalk would be removed. The LRHDC approved the plans according to the drawings that were presented and in good faith that the proposed work would be executed accordingly. As part of the application process, the Commission must be notified of any alterations to the approved design. Your letter of 2 April 1999 did state the changes of the north elevation; however, your changes were not approved prior to implementation. Consequently, you are requested to appear before the LRHDC at its next scheduled meeting. If there are questions, by all means call me at 244-5420. Respectfully, V. Anne Guthrie Historic Preservation Administrator xc: Little Rock Historic District Commission Anthony Black City of Little Rock Department of Housing & Neighborhood Programs Administration- 615 West Markham, Suite 100, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Phone 501-371-4748, Fax 501-399-3461 3 May 1999 Sarah Brown, Executive Director Quapaw Quarter Association P. O. Box 165023 Little Rock, AR 72216 Dear Sarah, On behalf of the Little Rock Historic District Commission (LRHDC), I am writing to notify you that the recent rehabilitation work on the Villa Marre did not have the approval of the LRHDC, as is required per city ordinance. Administrative approval for exterior repair work that requires a permit is allowed without appearing before the Commission. Please remember that all permits must have the approval (administratively or other) of the LRHDC. Also, as you know, the Villa Marre is located within the Capitol Zoning District, and their approval is required for exterior work; and the repair and rehabilitation work must comply with the state historic preservation program's facade easement regulations. Please know that the intent of this letter is in good faith and spirit and serves as a follow-up of our telephone conversation on the same subject. We are supportive completely of the QQA's efforts to properly maintain the historic structure, as it is a distinguishing asset in the historic district. Your association is known for its preservation efforts and is an example for historic neighborhoods and districts. If there are questions, by all means call me at 244-5420. Respectfully, V. Anne Guthrie Historic Preservation Administrator xc: Little Rock Historic District Commission Anthony Black 0 Graves l= Service,lnc. Little Rock, Arkansas ill i :Z :A":, 501-375-2438.501-375-8808 May 13, 1999 To: Anne Guthrie, Historic District Commission From: The Owners Representative, Raymon Hill Subject: Property at 902 Cumberland, Little Rock, AR. Dear Anne: First of all let me apologize for the problem I have created concerning the change of material select- ed for the building's front entrance on 9th street. I can assure you that this was not done intentional. Because you and the (LRHDC) board were so nice and very, very helpful to me in the rehabilitation work on the building at 902 Cumberland, and I greatly appreciate that. At the last November meeting approval was granted to replace all windows and close 9th street entrance with glass bricks. At that meeting a comment was made by one commissioner that we should use bronze window frames. After all other windows had been installed the appearance looked so great with bronze windows that we wanted to keep the same appearance throughout, not realizing at that time I should have contacted the (LRHDC). When we purchased the building it was in a run down condition most all windows were broken and looked very bad. We invested over half million dollars to restore the building in appearance, as well as service for Graves Litho. Graves Litho Service Inc. has operated their business in the down town area for 36 years and we are thrilled of our new location at 902 Cumberland. Our goal is to keep the appearance of our build- ing and property to meet the approval of the (LRHDC). You can be assured we will always consult with the (LRHDC) in the future. I hope that my conversation with you, and•this letter served to confirm my good intention was only to provide a uniform pleasantly exterior. Again please accept my apology, and thanks. If you have any questions please call me at 375-2438. Sincer y R on Hill General Manager 03/ea/199a 04:33 501-375-8808 GRAVES LITHO PAGE 02 112 Fast Second Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 5o1-375-2438.501-375-8M April 2, 1999 To: Anne Guthrie, Historic District Commission From: The Owners Representative, Raymon Hill Subject: Property at 902 Cumberland L.R. AR Dear Anne: At the last November meeting approval was granted to replace all windows and close 9th Street entrance with glass bricks. A comment was made to use bronze windows by one commissioner. After the fact we thought it would be better to change the glass bricks on 9th Street entrance to bronze win- dows to match all other windows. I hope this has not created a problem. If any questions please call me at 375-2438. Thanks again for all the help you gave me during this project. Since Ra on Hill General Manager