HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDC2011-026 Stafff Report, Project Backgroud And Description 09/12/2011DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
fjos� ' LITTLE ROCK
723 West Markham Street
HISTORIC
�Irl�� E ID;R Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
; F4 � , . DISTRICT
•� �s COMMISSION Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. A.
DATE: September 12, 2011
APPLICANT: Stefan Vickery, Vickery Construction LLC
ADDRESS: 904-906 Commerce Street
COA REQUEST: Siding and Trim; Porch Rebuild; and Windows
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is located at 904-906 Commerce
Street. The property's legal description is "The West 66
feet of Lots 10, 11 and 12, Block 59 Original City of Little
Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas."
This building was built in the 1890's. The 2007 survey
form states: "This one-story Queen Anne has a front
facing wing with bay windows and segmented roof with
the same side facing wing termination. A porch with
minimal decoration fills between the front and side
wings." It is considered a "Contributing Structure" to the
MacArthur Park Historic District.
This application is a result of an enforcement action. The
removal of the original weatherboard, replacing the porch
decking, and adding railings and columns were started
without a COA by the HDC.
il
CAPlr !rH 0 .
_ � � GC CAPITOL
N
arrr j . / i , -o a
iarh a
NrA fr iora'en
� — -
ra
�f :a
�w
6H BA `!
r e
Location of Project
The proposal is to replace siding that is different than that removed, replace columns on porch
that are different to the original, add spindled frieze detail between columns, replace deck
boards on porch, add built in bench on porch and replace all window with vinyl windows.
A letter was sent on June 6, 2011 certified return receipt requested to the owners. It was
returned undeliverable. A letter informing the owner that they were in the district was mailed
along with others in May 2006 and in January 2011.
Community Development Block Grants
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) were
created by Congress with the Passage of Title I of the
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Act of 1974.
HUD's CDBG program was intended to consolidate pro-
grams and services, replace existing Urban Renewal and
Model Cities programs, and place more responsibility in
the hands of local governments concerning the expendi-
ture of federal funds. In Little Rock approximately
$2,824,701 in CDBG funds have been expended to im-
prove streets, drainage, and infrastructure facilities. Dur-
ing the first 30 years of the CDBG Program, more than 30
miles of Little Rock streets have been improved, 23.5
miles of drainage facilities have been installed, and 38
miles of sidewalks have been constructed.
American Dream Downpayment Assistance Program
(ADDI)
The ADDI is a federally funded program designed to help
low-income families make a down -payment on a home.
The purchaser must be a first-time home -buyer with an
income not to exceed 80% of the median income for the
applicable county. The program must be used in conjunc-
tion with bond money. No repayment is required if the
buyer remains in the home for five years. The amount of
the down -payment shall be six percent of the sales price
to a maximum amount of $10,000 for down -payment and
closing costs. A house built prior to 1978 must be lead -
tested, must be inspected by a City Codes Inspector, and
must be, before the closing, free of Codes deficiencies
that are hazards to health or safety. The homebuyer is re-
quired to successfully complete an eight (8) hour housing
counseling course through an approved agency. Applica-
tion is made through a mortgage lender, and the process is
started simply by making the offer to buy contingent upon
the buyer obtaining a ADDI grant from the City of Little
Rock.
�O 11
`
1 p �p"+
of
Community Development Block Grants
have been used to build sidewalks and
install street lights in many of Little
Rock's historic districts.
Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas 76
2007 Survey photo front
2007 Survey photo south side
2007 Survey photo north side
finII �A
Current Photo front
J1..k
Current Photo front with tower
Front view after siding removal
PREVIOUS ACTIONS ON THIS SITE:
On January 13, 1988, an action was noted to replace partially burned roof, remove chimney,
replace windows and replace front door by the Applicant Lanelle McCollum. No notation was
found in the file to say if the COA was approved or not.
PROPOSAL:
The proposal is divided into three parts. The first part is "Siding and Trim." Most of this
normally could have been handled with a COC, but the applicant has desired to replace the
vertical shiplap siding that is evident on the front bay with horizontal 6" weatherboard to match
the rest of the house. This is shown in the photos above and particularly in the photo labeled
"2007 Survey photo south side" and "Current Photo front with tower." In the 1988 photo, the
Elderly residents in historic neighbor-
hoods may qualify for tax abatement
programs and loans for home repair
(2200 block of S. Battery Street).
Elderly Housing Program Loans (DHP)
Homeowners who are 62 years of age or older or disabled
and whose income does not exceed 50% of the area me-
dian for households of the same size may be considered
for an "Elderly Home Repair Loan." This is a deferred
payment loan of up to $25,000 to bring the home up to
full code standards. If the maximum loan will not be
enough to bring the house up to full code, no loan will be
made. The City requires a lien on the property to assure
that the -borrower continues to own and occupy the home,
but releases the lien after 5 — 10 years (depending on the
amount of the assistance) provided these conditions are
met.
Leveraged Home Rehabilitation Loans
Low-income persons who own and occupy their home
within Little Rock may apply at any time for a
"Leveraged Rehabilitation Loan." Applicants must be
willing and able to borrow 50% of the total rehabilitation
costs from a bank. The remaining 50% of the costs will be
provided by the City in the form of a forgivable loan.
These funds are forgiven by the City over a period of five
to ten years, depending on the amount of the loan, pro-
vided the homeowner continues to own and occupy the
home. The City gives technical assistance to help the
homeowner determine Code deficiencies, describe the
work needed, estimate costs, apply for the bank loan, find
a reliable contractor who will do the work for a fair price,
and assure that the contracted work is done in keeping
with industry standards.
77 Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas
vertical siding was evident. This vertical siding was approximately 9-12" wide and had a shiplap
edge. To replace with horizontal 6" weatherboard would be a change in materials and design
and would require a COA.
Replacing rotten soffit, fascia, frieze detailing, corner boards, and "mud boards" with the same
profile wood is not normally subject to a COA.
_5?1NDLE FPYE2E DETAIL.-.
f
I �x�
v1.- 7o Pirti
S pINOLE
cNE-
/'`
L I 1
Shy QoPLki�
Spindle Frieze detail
I
1988 survey photo
l��
The second part is "Front Porch Rebuild." This was the original violation observed by Staff.
The front porch decking was removed and replaced without a COA or COC. It was replaced
with 5/4" pressure treated wood. New stairs were added along with new handrails along stairs.
The new handrails are made of 4x4 posts with 2x4 rails and 2x2 poplar spindles. The double
columns, as shown in the
photos above, were
replaced with square 8x8
fiberglass columns. The
detailing of the posts caps
and hageS were eliminated. - --
A built-in bench forms the
railing along the front of the
porch. The 1988 photo
shows a very utilitarian
railing on the porch, one
that was probably not
original to the house. See
photo above labeled 1988
Survey Photo. A handrail
was installed on the south
half of the porch as
described.
i
Sketch of proposal.
6 lrft a. LlL 6-1 U �.,J s
6e A..,,L
A spindle frieze detail is proposed along the top of the porch to be constructed out of 5/4 poplar,
2x2 poplar spindles and 3/4 cove molding.
B. Regulatory Tools for Historic Preservation
Overview
Financial incentives are one approach to spurring rehabili-
tation and revitalization efforts. However, property own-
ers may also agree to create local ordinance historic dis-
tricts and overlays for their areas in order to provide a
regulatory framework for design review. In Little Rock,
the city utilizes both local ordinance historic districts and
design overlay districts. The state government also pro-
vides a separate design review process for properties
within the Capitol Zoning District.
Local Ordinance Historic Districts
Local ordinance historic districts are allo eunder the
city's Historic Preservation Ordinance whi was enacted
in 1981 and amended in 2007. The Coa consultation
with the Arkansas Historic Presofition Program and Lit-
tle Rock Planning Commissiorcan propose areas that
meet the requirements for such districts. Public hearings
are then required to solicit support prior to the enactment
of a local ordinance historic district. As of 2009, only the
MacArthur Park Neighborhood has approved such a dis-
trict. Local ordinance historic districts provide for design
review of exterior rehabilitation, new construction and
demolition. Prior to receiving a Building Permit, property
owners must first obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness
(COA) from the HDC. This ensures that the proposed pro-
ject is compatible with the architectural character and sur-
roundings of the property.
.,,.
>
CO}f11
� �
J
.w•rucana� rna �
CERTIFICATE. OF APPROPRIATENF,SS
mfLa
l Ikyrm A,v.�"ar./,Y1Rra,,,wu, Nr
h klr�0.ew
r..a .-�_.4.�e.Lww.•..A a...tar,�.,rrry.v+s�N
f]fksd r�u,�r,,.. ❑.bw..d OaRwa.a.i�cn.ac�Ow..efw rda�
Id1 Rwi.lfwnnwn�w:y.aw • ppp..¢,nf Preeay ra8r.rli>r�
,..1'rrY. A.+.i,i:m.laik F.LwN.,.'::-Y.>r Snf:lil�Yn.f,a nClr/wkl5
Property owners in local ordinance
historic districts must receive a Certifi-
cate of Appropriateness before con-
ducting work subject to design review.
Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas 78
The third portion of the application is the replacement of the all sashes with "Atrium vinyl white
double hung windows with 6 lite upper sash. Low E/Argon (U factor 0.31, SHGC 0.29). These
windows would replace the original wood windows in the structure.
ANALYSIS:
The Secretary of Interior stands that apply to the application are a follows:
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The
removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial
relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and
use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding
conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be
undertaken.
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or
examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the
severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature
will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials.
Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical
evidence.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy
historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property.
The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the
historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the
integrity of the property and its environment.
The first part of the application is the Siding and Trim. Again, the
replacement of broken cracked and warped pieces of siding and trim
with pieces of same profile and size is usually a matter of COC's.
However, the removal of a large characteristic accent siding as the
vertical shiplap siding is not appropriate for a contributing house.
The vertical siding is a defining element on the fagade of this house.
Replacing it with horizontal weatherboard is not appropriate.
The second portion of the application is the Front Porch Rebuild.
The replacing of the porch decking and handrails is simple enough
to blend with the structure. The replacing of the posts on the porch
with ones that are twice the size of the original also removed
character -defining elements of the house. The built-in in bench in
not in keeping whatsoever with the period of the house. The bench
should be removed and replaced with more handrails to match the
new handrails. The new columns should also be removed and the
older posts replicated.
This house was, as far as our records show, a rather plain utilitarian
house without all of the fretwork as typical of the more extravagant
Victorian houses. To add a spindle frieze to a house that did not
have on originally is to add a false sense of history to the structure. Proposed Column Profile
The Hillcrest Historic District has a
Design Overlay District to promote
compatible new construction with his-
toric dwelling such as at 4220 Wood -
If
lawn Drive.
Design Overlay Districts
Design Overlay Districts (DODs) provide an additional
layer of design standards beyond that normally provided
in the underlying base zoning. These overlay zones are
generally used to protect or maintain a particular design
theme to support an architectural style or period.
The city currently has eight Design Overlay Districts:
• Presidential Park Overlay District
'ver Market Overla District {
I o D ✓Nl
• Central City verlay District �� 6
Granite Mountain Overlay District
Hillcrest Overlay District
• Midtown Overlay District
Highway 10
Chenal/Financial Center
A ninth DOD for the Central High School Neighborhood
is presently under discussion.
With the exception of the River Market Overlay District,
the design review oversight is within the Department of
Planning and Development. The River Market Overlay
District has its own design review committee.
The advantage of DODs is additional design requirements
tailored specifically for that area. This can include re-
quirements for building footprints, height, and setbacks.
DODs, however, do not provide for design review of the
appearance of new construction and additions, nor do they
require review, or prohibit demolition.
X/
79 Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas
The third portion of the application is the replacement of the original windows. The 2007 survey
states that there is a combination of 6/1, 6/6 and 1/1 windows on the house. The Proposal is to
replace all the windows with 6/1 windows regardless of the original lite arrangement. As stated
in the research done for the Commission on replacement windows, a storm windows in addition
to a repaired original wood window will have a combined U-value of .50 with a 4.5 year payback
in energy savings. Vinyl windows, as proposed, would have a 0.31 U value, but a 240 year
payback in energy savings, and the original historic fabric is lost. Replacement of these
windows with vinyl windows is not appropriate when a similar energy saving can be had with the
addition of storm windows.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: At the time of distribution, there were no
comments regarding this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a building permit.
2. Approval of the following items:
1. Replacement of broken cracked and warped pieces of siding and trim with pieces of
same profile and size.
2. Decking on front porch.
3. Railings on front porch with extension to location of removed bench.
3. Denial of the following items:
1. Replacing vertical siding with horizontal weatherboard.
2. Built-in bench on front porch.
3. 8x8 fiberglass columns on front porch.
4. Spindle frieze detail.
5. Replacement vinyl windows.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends this item be deferred to the August 8, 2011 hearing because the applicant did
not receive his list form the abstract company in time, therefore, letters were not mailed to
property owners in a timely manner.
COMMISSION ACTION: _ July 11, 2011
A motion was made to defer the item to the August 8, 2011 agenda and was passed with a vote
of 5 ayes and 0 noes.
COMMISSION ACTION:
August 8, 2011
A discussion was held on the applicant being required to get four votes out of the entire
commission to get his item passed. The applicant conferred with the owners and decided to
take the deferral that the commission offered. A motion was made to defer the item to the
September 12, 2011 agenda and was passed with a vote of 4 ayes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE: September 12, 2011
Staff has researched the address from the QQA files at the ASI. General photos of the park did
not reveal any photos of the structure in question. A photo was found from 1979 and in shown
below. The photo shows that the house has not had major improvements since 1979, except
for the work that is the subject of this COA. It does show that there was not a railing on the
porch at that time. It does clearly shows the dual column treatment on the porch.
Capitol Zoning District
The state legislature enacted its own design review proc-
ess when it created the Capitol Zoning District and Com-
mission. This Commission was design review authority
for the area around the State Capitol as well as the Gover-
nor's Mansion Historic District. Property owners in these
areas must first obtain a CZDC permit before beginning
any work on additions or alterations to existing structures
and before beginning work on a new structure or perma-
nent site improvement. A CZDC permit is a prerequisite _
to a city Building Permit but may be required event when
a Building Permit is not. No permit is required for routine
maintenance.
As in the case of local ordinance historic districts, a COA
is also required for work undertaken within the Capitol
Zoning District. Minor modifications and some rehabilita-
tion work may be approved on a staff level but full Com-
mission approval is generally needed when major altera-
tions or new buildings are proposed. Demolition of struc-
tures may not be completed without receiving a permit
from the Commission.
New construction on vacant lots in the Capitol Zoning District
would be reviewed to ensure compatibility with adjacent build-
ings (22"d and Louisiana Streets).
Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas 80
There is evidence that this house used to face Ninth Street, but at some time between the 1897
and the 1913 Sanborn fire maps, the house was moved to its' current location. A porch on the
south side of the house had been _
removed after the moving of the
house, but that is the extent of the
information that can be gleaned from
the fire insurance maps.
The house is a contributing structure
to the MacArthur Park National
Register Historic District. The district
was designated in 1977 and
resurveyed in 2006. It is a
contributing structure "as is." To add
-�
additional ornamentation to this
structure would not comply with the
Secretary of interiors Standards #3,
which states: "Each property shall be 1979 photo from QQA files at ASI
recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense
of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements form
other buildings, shall not be undertaken."
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND REACTION: One email has been received in opposition
to the vinyl windows.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a building permit.
2. Approval of the following items:
• Replacement of broken cracked and warped pieces of siding and trim with pieces
of same profile and size.
• Decking on front porch.
• Railings on front porch with extension to location of removed bench.
3. Denial of the following items:
• Replacing vertical siding with horizontal weatherboard.
• Built-in bench on front porch.
• 8x8 fiberglass columns on front porch.
• Spindle frieze detail.
• Replacement vinyl windows.
COMMISSION ACTION:
ber 12. 2011
There was a discussion on the procedure concerning the hearing of the item. With only four
commissioners present, the discussion concerned if the item could be deferred after it was
started, who would be charged for the deferral (if it was deferred) and if the applicant could
modify his application by deleting portions of it and if he could come back at a later date with a
similar application for the deleted portions. The applicant was offered a deferral since there
were five or less commissioners present and the applicant stated that he wanted to hear his
item at the meeting. The Commission and the applicant agreed that if portions of the item were
deleted, that it could be refiled within 12 months, since it was not heard. Brian Minyard, Staff,
The Land Bank may be a useful tool to
prevent demolition of vacant properties
such as this dwelling at 1420 Booker
Street.
Little Rock Land Bank Commission
A new city commission which holds promise for historic
preservation efforts is the Little Rock Land Bank Com-
mission (LBC). The mission of the LBC is to "reverse
blight, increase home ownership and stability of property
values, provide affordable housing, improve the health
and safety of neighborhoods within the City, and maintain
the architectural fabric of the community through the
study, acquisition, and disposition of vacant, abandoned,
tax delinquent, and city lien property while collaborating
with citizens, neighborhoods, developers, non-profit or-
ganizations and other governmental agencies."
The LBC can acquire properties through a variety of ac-
tions including foreclosure due to code violations, proper-
ties that are considered vacantand abandoned, properties
that are tax delinquent offered at auction, properties
that are bank-foreclosedand properties donated by the
owner. The priorities of the LBC are based on a combina-
tion of three factors: the intended or planned use of the
property; the nature and identity of the transferee of the
property, and;Kthe impact of the property transfer on the
short and long term neighborhood and community devel-
opment plans. Historic preservation is one of thirteen pri-
orities identified in the use of property by the LBC.
Acquiring properties fo redevelopment is one of the pri-
mary goals of the LBVut it should also be utilized to
obtain deteriorated but restorable properties in National
Register -listed and — eligible historic districts. Many of
the blocks in the city's older and historic neighborhoods
have vacant and abandoned houses adjacent to one an-
other. Rather than raze these and take them off the tax
rolls in anticipation for future development, the LBC
should consider selling these properties at a minimal fee
to new owners who will commit to investing both finan-
cial resources and labor to their rehabilitation. This ap-
proach is similar to that of Urban Homesteading Program
and a combination of these types of programs could to-
gether stimulate reinvestment in neighborhoods that need
it the most. Historic preservation should be a key priority
for acquisition by the LB(bhistoric preservation and
neighborhood community leaders should serve on the
LBC as well.
81 Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas
stated that if the applicant were to file sometime this week that it could be on the October 2011
agenda since the legal ad had not been placed yet.
The commission did not wish for a presentation by Staff.
Commissioner Julie Wiedower stated that she did not think that the vertical siding was original
to the structure and questioned if it was appropriate.
Stefan Vickery, the applicant, stated that he wanted to amend his application to go back with the
vertical siding on the bay and replicate what was there. Commissioner Wiedower asked if any
wood was left and if it could be reused. She also asked if the matching horizontal siding was
available. Mr. Vickery said that the horizontal siding was available and that he could mill the
vertical siding to match.
Commissioner Randy Ripley asked what the original porch decking boards were. Mr. Vickery
said that they were 5/4 pressure treated pine and were replaced with the same.
Commissioner Chris Vanlandingham asked about the column changes, what materials they
were and how they could be changed out.
Commissioner Ripley asked about the distance to the ground form the porch and it was
determined that a handrail was indeed needed for safety codes.
Commissioner Wiedower stated that she thought that ti was a hybrid house with the evidence
that it was moved and was probably modified when it was moved. It is not easy to figure out.
She continued that the vertical siding is historic now and should go back along with the paired
columns. She cannot support the bench on the front porch nor support the window changes.
She cannot support the spindle frieze either.
Commissioner Ripley asked if the windows were driven by the owner of the building. Mr.
Vickery said that they are custom sashes with 6/1 pane arrangement. Mr. Vickery stated that
the windows were in bad condition. He did say the trim could be saved and it was a sash
replacement. Mr. Vickery stated that the vinyl was white in color. Commissioner Ripley asked
what if the windows were not vinyl.
Commissioner Vanlandingham stated that saving the windows in the bays was a big step. He
continued to speak on the columns and their sizes. Commissioner Wiedower asked if they were
to be a box column or solid. Mr. Vickery said that they would be a box column with a 1 x wrap
on the top and bottom with cove molding on the top.
Mr. Vickery amended his application to state the following:
• Removal of built-in bench on front porch
• Replace bench with railing to match recently installed railing.
• Replacing vertical siding on bay to match other bay's vertical siding.
• Removal of 8x8 fiberglass columns on front porch.
■ Replacement columns to be 6x6" box construction columns with 1x wrap on bottom
and top with cove mold on top. Layout to match 1979 photo.
• Removal of the vinyl windows from this application.
• Removal of the spindle frieze from this application.
C. Recendations for Additional Protection
Theceityof Little Rock has two primary methods of pro -
hi historic properties within a regulatory framework;
local historic r inance districts and Design Overlay Dis-
tricts. ough local ordinance historic . districts have
been available to property owners and neighborhoods for
over 25 years, only the MacArthur Park neighborhood has
moved forward to approve such an overlay for their area.
s/ In some neighborhoodoi here is the perception that local
ordinance historic districts are too restrictive and place
too many burdens on the property owner. Design Overlay
Districts on the other hand are seen as having limited ef-
fectiveness in historic areas since they do not prevent in-
appropriate alterations, demolition or the appearance of
new construction. A third approac%which is recom-
mended for Little Roc�� s to adopt Conservation Zoning
or to adopt guidelines f6r limited local o inance historic
districts. r �
if
Action —Adopt Conservation Zoning Provision
and Promote its Use
An important preservation tool which has been widely
adopted in communities across the country is Conserva-
tion Zoning. Conservation Zoning is an overlay which
encourages compatible new buildings and additions in
historic areas while discouraging demolition. The purpose
of Conservation Zoning is to protect neighborhood char -
a ter, guide future development, stabilize property values
nd encourage revitalization. In a Conservation Zone,
I'v/only new const&u ign, additions to historic properties,
and demolition 1& reviewed. This scope of review helps
maintain the appropriate size, massing, setback, building
form, building orientation and alignment, and character
defaning features d materials of properties within the
designated area
In Arkansas, Cone ation Zoning is currently not avail-
able within state lav&nd would require a legislative act to
have it approved. f s to enact this type of overlay are
recommended to occur in the next one to three years. In
the meantime, local ordinance historic districts could be
approved by neighborhoods with limited application and
guidelines following the same language and intent as
Conservation Zones. The HDC could adopt such lan-
guage, prepare guidelines and conduct design review on a
limited basis.
Conservation zoning or limited historic
ordinance districts would ensure that
new construction was compatible with
adjacent historic buildings. This new
dwelling was subject to design review
in the MacArthur Park Historic Dis-
trict (1421 Cumberland Street).
A Conservation Zoning overlay in his-
toric districts such as Marshall Square
would require design review only for
additions to houses but not for siding,
window or porch alterations (802 E.
18`h Street).
/ I
Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas 82
Commissioner Ripley commented on the mixing and matching of the windows and the
Mr. Minyard restated the application and its modifications for the commission and the applicant.
It is as follows:
• Replacement of broken cracked and warped pieces of siding and trim with pieces
of same profile and size.
• Decking on front porch.
• Existing Railings on front porch
• Removal of built-in bench on front porch
■ Replace bench with railing to match recently installed railing.
■ Replacing vertical siding on bay to match other bay's vertical siding.
• Removal of 8x8 fiberglass columns on front porch.
• Replacement columns to be 6x6" box construction columns with 1x wrap on bottom
and top with cove mold on top. Layout to match 1979 photo.
• No window repair or installations of new windows are included in this COA.
• No installation of a spindle frieze on porch is included in this COA.
Commissioner Wiedower made a motion to approve the application as amended by the
applicant and Commissioner Ripley seconded the motion. It was approved with a vote of 4
ayes, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
These new houses at S. Spring and W.
23rd Streets are compatible with the
adjacent dwellings along the block and
provide appropriate models for
neighborhoods such as South End and
Stephens.
This new construction in the 5000
block of Stonewall Road in the Heights
Neighborhood is out of scale with his-
toric dwellings along the same block.
Action — Adopt Design Overlay Districts or Conservation
Zoning Provisions to Promote Appropriate Infill
New construction poses different challenges in Little
Rock's historic neighborhoods. In areas without any pro-
tective zoning or overlays, new buildings can be con-
structed without any consideration of adjacent historic
properties. Some builders and developers make a good
effort to construct compatible buildmi hiie others build
standardized plans without regard to heir surroundings.
In neighborhoods such as Stephens or South Enoew
construction often reflects designs more appropriate for
new subdivisions. In the Heights and Prospect Terrace,
new construction is sometimes out of scale and massing
with the adjacent historic houses.
The creation of Atective overlays such as Design Over-
lay Districts or Conservation Zoning provides neighbor-
hood residents with responsibility for future development.
Standards for each DOD or Conservation Zone can be
tailored to reflect the design review standards proposed by
residents. The standards may be written to allow for spe-
cific approaches to building design, square footage and lot
coverage. Without protective overlayaesidents will lack
any effective response to development or c struction out
of keeping with their neighborhoods.
This new construction in the 1400 block of Taylor Street is out
of scale and design with the adjacent dwellings in the proposed
Fair Park Historic District.
83 Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
r LITTLE ROCK
;'r'� i p• d HISTORIC 723 West Markham Street
DISTRICT Little Rock, Arkansas72201-1334
COb9MISSION Phone: (SOl) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
1. Application Date: t,— u
2. Date of Public Hearing: 1 — 1 at 5:00 p.m.
3. Address of Property:,_ D ��o+[A Co?—r- G2. c-,{ .
4. Legal Description of Property:_%.3 J AR LK 5 35 7 1y F C-- 7(-1
t�'r It & N16 -3 ` 0 F LT 10 r
5. Property Owner (Printed Name, Address, Phone, Em/a"i�l): CA RA f i EAk-@ re c i r�� S
; ,, I `'� a q';An/ f I 5A4M Pa ) [ rk --/ _14D, AtL!.. h4-
6. Owner's Agent: (Printed Name, Address, Phone, Email): Ste+an.t V le-UC
Ll 13 C . Si —�y� i C4 � N L LI J1) .23„ 23 2. 3 i C1LEty4anSf ru�kbN LLG�9� ti�
7. Brief Project Description:-izo0'r P,RLO Le- --.
A. r I" L3 r-k d,,U 0041rrp M.--f-
> . Estimated Cost of Improvements: D o
9. Zoning Classification: Is the proposed ang a e milted use? � No
10. Signature of Owner or Agent:
(The owner will need to aulhod ge orpe on presenting the owner at the public hearing).
NOTE: Should there be changes during construction (design, materials, size, etc.) from the approved COA,
applicant shall notify Commission staff and take appropriate actions. Approval by the Commission does not
excuse applicant or property from compliance with other applicable codes, ordinances or policies of the city
unless stated by the Commission or staff. Responsibility for identifying such codes, ordinances, or policies rests
with the applicant, owner, or agent.
...-•-----• •-•----•...................... ..........._...................................... .......... ...................
(This section to be completed by staff):
Little Rock Historic District Commission Action
Denied _ Withdrawn _ Approved _ Approved with Conditions --_ See Attached Conditions
Staff Signature.
tion
Date:
Revised 7/2009
Action — Adopt a Demolition by Neglect Ordinance Provision
A constant theme in Little Rock's Neighborhood Action
Plans is the loss of buildings due to deterioration on the
part of the owner. A term widely used to describe this
type of deterioration is "Demolition by Neglect." Demoli-
tion by neglect is defined as the destruction of a building
through abandonment or lack of maintenance. There are a
number of scenarios that contribute to the neglect of his-
toric properties, including impoverished owners, difficul-
ties arising from unsettled estates, absentee landlords or
simply an uncaring attitude on the part of an owner.
Sometimes neglect is precipitated by the desire to be rid
of the buildin)r as a way of avoiding rehabilitation costs
while determ Ir the best use of the property.
17 V11,
In order to prevent demolition by neglectAnany com-
munities have passed minimum maintenance codes
or added demolition by neglect provisions to their
historic preservation ordinances. Common language
of these provisions generally requires owners to
keep the property maintained to prevent deteriora-
tion or structural defects. Owners, or other persons
having legal possession, are required upon request
by the municipality to stabilize or repair such exterior
features if they are found to be deteriorating, or if
their condition is contributing to deterioration of the
property or the district. This generally includes:
Deterioration of exterior walls, foundations, or
other vertical support that causes leaning,
sagging, splitting, listing, or buckling.
Ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls,
roofs, and foundations, including broken winj
dows or doors.
Defective protection or lack of weather prote¢
tion for exterior wall and roof coverings. 1
Rotting, holes, and other forms of decay.
Deterioration of exterior stairs, porches, hand-
rails, window and door frames, cornices, en-
tablatures, wall facings, and architectural de-
tails.-fi �Ll�
Demolition by Neglect provisions ncludet information
regarding compliance and penalties as well. The adoption
of such an ordinance provision is recommended to occur
within the next one to three years.
Demolition by neglect provisions
would require owners of vacant prop-
erties to maintain houses to minimum
standards (420 E. 91h Street).
Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas 84
Stefan Vickery (Owner's Agent)
(479)236-2323
vickeryconstructionllc@gmail.com
5413 C Street
Little Rock, AR 72205
June 6, 2011
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
To whom it may concern:
It is the intent of CARR Enterprises to repair the exterior of the property located on 904 South
Commerce Street. A recent inspection of the property has revealed that much of the exterior is severely
damaged to the point where if repairs are not made the structure of the building will be seriously
compromised.
The overall goal of this project is to preserve the basic integrity of this property and upgrading its energy
savings while improving the aesthetics of the house.
In consideration of the state of the property and the budget allowed for repairs we request that leniency
be made in the selection of some materials, methods and design aspects of the overall project.
All installations and construction designs have been made with regard to local building codes.
The scope of the proposes repairs are in three parts:1. Siding and trim 2. Front porch rebuild 3. Window
replacement.
Siding and Trim:
-Replace all rotten or damaged siding with matching beveled yellow pine 36" X 6" weatherboards.
-Replace all rotten or damaged soffit with 1 X 6 select yellow pine.
-Replace all rotten or damaged fascia with 1 X 6 select yellow pine.
-Replace all rotten or damaged fascia detail with 1'/<" poplar cove crown.
-Replace all rotten or damaged frieze detail with 1'/<" poplar cove crown.
-Replace all rotten or damaged corner boards with 5/4 finger joint radia pine.
-Replace all rotten or damaged "mud boards" with 1 X 12" finger joint cedar.
Front Porch Rebuild:
-Replace existing 4 X 4 columns with square 8 X 8 fiberglass with base and cap.
-Add spindled frieze detail between columns as to integrate Queen Anne architectural elements. Frieze
cap and base to be made from 5/4 poplar and 2 X 2 poplar spindles.
-Replace existing pressure treated 5/4 deck boards with new pressure treated pine 5/4 deck boards for
flooring and stairs.
Cover Letter
Urban Homesteading programs pro-
vide opportunities to reverse abandon-
ment and demolition of older houses in
neighborhoodMuch as Stephens (1600
S. Woodrow Street).
D. Recommendations for Additional Financial
Incentives
Financial incentives are available to property owners of
historic buildings through federal and state tax credits,
various state grants, and city assistance programs. While
these efforts have contributed to neighborhood and down-
town revitalization, the level of vacant and underutilized
properties in the historic areas of the city suggest that
other financial programs may be of use. Two additional
programs have been useful in other cities and should be
considered in Little Rock: Urban Homesteading and Re-
volving Funds. /
Action — Reduce Abandonment and Demolition Through
an Urban Homesteading Program
In order to address the problem of deteriorated and vacant
housing in its historic neighborhoods, the City of Little
Rock should consider establishing an Urban Homestead
Program. In this type of program a city buys and reno-
vates vacant and abandoned houses for resale to low- or
moderate -income households. Homesteaders must meet
certain income requirements and are offered a low -
interest loan. They must live in and maintain the dwelling
for a minimum period of time. Such programs have
proven. to be effective tools in revitalizing neighborhoods
in cities across the country, including Davenport, Iowa. In
other communities such as Richmond, Virginia, properties
are condemned, acquired by the local government, reha-
bilitated and then sold for $1 plus the cost of rehabilita-
tion.
Houses available through most Urban Homesteading pro-
grams are generally valued from $75,000 to $150,000 af-
ter rehabilitation. Houses of various sizes are targeted for
,these programs. To purchase an Urban Homesteading
I.,/housRnost programs require a family (consisting of at
least'&e steadily employed person who is 21 years old or
older), must have good credit and qualify for a low -
interest loan. The family must generally also be a first-
time homebuyer and own no other real property. Program
idelines also prescribe minimum and maximum in-
com uch as combined gross family income being at
least 35,000 - $40,000 per year.
85 Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas
-Install new handrail with pressure treated pine 2 X 4 upper and lower rails and 2 X 2 square spindles.
-Install built in bench between north set of columns. Pressure treated pine 2 X 4 framing with pressure
treated pine 5/4 deck boards for seat and back rest.
Window Replacement:
-Replace all sashes with Atrium vinyl white double hung with 6 lite upper sash. Low-E/Argon (U Factor:
0.31, SHGC: 0.29)
1 look forward to working with the historical committee.
Thanks,
Stefan Vickery
Cover Letter continued
Urban Homesteading Programs can help to rejuvenate
neighborhoods that are in decline by improving one build-
ing at a time. This type of incremental revitalization typi-
cally has a longer lasting impact on areas than more tradi-
tional large-scale projects. Urban Homesteading is cost-
effective as it utilizes existing resources. It can also have
a positive ripple effect by enhancing neighborhoods and
encouraging additional housing rehabilitation. This type
of program helps to build community pride and identity
by maintaining the historic character of a neighborhood
and strengthening residents' commitment to the area.
Action — Promote Rehabilitation Through a Revolving
Fund Program
Rehabilitation can also be promoted th" Revolving
Fund Programs. In this type of prograwthe city loans
funds for building rehabilitation up to a certain amount
and at an interest rate several points below prime. These
loans are generally for property owners who reside in Na-
tional Register -listed or —eligible historic districts or prop-
erties within local historic or conservation overlay zones.
Such loans are intended to provide positive incentives to
property owners in these districts to maintain and improve
the community's architectural heritage.
In most programs eligible properties are fifty years old
and contribute to the character of the district or overlay
zone. Loan amounts can range from $10,000 to $30,000
with terms of 2% or 3% for ten to fifteen years. Rehabili-
tation must be in keeping with the city's historic design
review guidelines. As the loans are paid bacWhey go
back into the revolving fund to be loaned again Me- another
property.
Successful Revolving Fund programs are found through-
out the country and serve as models for Little Rock. The
Providence, Rhode Island Revolving Fund is a commu-
nity -based, non-profit, development and lending corpora-
tion which was established in 1980. It manages two capi-
tal funds, the Neighborhood Loan Fund with over $2 mil-
lion in assets and the Downcity Loan Fund with $6.5 mil-
lion. The Revolving Fund's resources are targeted to spe-
cific historic neighborhoods and primarily serve low -to -
moderate income families and merchants in the Down-
town Providence National Register District.
The use of Urban Homesteading and
Revolving Fund programs could assist
in reversing vacancy and abandonment
(3412 W. 131h Street).
Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas 86
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
LITTLE ROCK
HISTORIC 723 West Markham Street
DISTRICT Litdc Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
9 r COMMISSION Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
r,
APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
1. Application Date: _ f] ` if
2. Date of Public Hearing: 1 _ 1 •— I at 5:00 p.m.
3. Address of Property: D L( r G
F C 74 r
4. Legal Description of Property: � )-. �
�. r— I-r- 11 & iv I o f E 7 `� '_ o s= LT I U 5
5. Property Owner (Printed Name, Address, Phone, Email): LN A r /� s, 5 � -
t I n 1 4{ - n r ` .. f r,, -4- e- P,r le 1, rt l 1 _ i-A j ► IC Ae , tt � ��
6. Owner's Agent: (Printed Name, Address, Phone, Email): to Fo t t
} o 4 � � �� 2 3 2 �[► i t LCe r Lanstr+� �b+u LL��9� ^^ �
7. Brief Project ❑esCrfpEion:r -1[oµT oRLLH Q
tA.. .J f-c<�. rsvi4r;.r1 VIAIG[f fO rn $ is
QAL Ti' LJ iNAO� - O a
�. Estimated Cost of Improvements: o U
9. Zoning Classification: Is the proposed ang a 'tied use? 49� No
10. Signature of Owner or Agent:
(The owner will need to aufhod ge orpa n resenting the owner at the public hearing).
NOTE: Should there be changes during construction (design, materiais, size, etc.) from the approved COA,
applicant shalt notify Commission staff and take appropriate actions. Approval by the Commission does not
excuse applicant or property from compliance with other applicabte codes, ordinances or policies of the city
unless stated tsy the Commission or staff. Responsibitity for identifying such codes, ordinances, or policies rests
with the applicant, owner, or agent.
------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ --..............
(This section to be completed by staff):
Little Rack Historic District Commission Action
_ Denied _ Withdrawn _ Approved _ Approved with Conditions _ See Attached Conditions
Staff Signature:_ Date:. _
Revised 7/2009
7
Stefan Vickery (Owner's Agent)
(479)236-2323
vickeryconstructionllc@gmail.com
5413 C Street
Little Rock, AR 72205
June 6, 2011
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
To whom it may concern:
It is the intent of CARR Enterprises to repair the exterior of the property located on 904 South
Commerce Street. A recent inspection of the property has revealed that much of the exterior is severely
damaged to the point where if repairs are not made the structure of the building will be seriously
compromised.
The overall goal of this project is to preserve the basic integrity of this property and upgrading its energy
savings while improving the aesthetics of the house.
In consideration of the state of the property and the budget allowed for repairs we request that leniency
be made in the selection of some materials, methods and design aspects of the overall project.
All installations and construction designs have been made with regard to local building codes.
The scope of the proposes repairs are in three parts: 1. Siding and trim 2. Front porch rebuild 3. Window
replacement.
Siding and Trim:
-Replace all rotten or damaged siding with matching beveled yellow pine W X 6" weatherboards. ------
-Replace all rotten or damaged soffit with 1 X 6 select yellow pine.
-Replace all rotten or damaged fascia with 1 X 6 select yellow pine.
-Replace all rotten or damaged fascia detail with I X" poplar cove crown.
-Replace all rotten or damaged frieze detail with 1 Y4" poplar cove crown.
-Replace all rotten or damaged corner boards with 5/4 finger joint radia pine.
-Replace all rotten or damaged "mud boards" with 1 X 12" fingerjoint cedar.
Front Porch Rebuild:
-Replace existing 4 X 4 columns with square 8 X 8 fiberglass with base and cap.
-Add spindled frieze detail between columns as to integrate Queen Anne architectural elements. Frieze
cap and base to be made from 5/4 poplar and 2 X 2 poplar spindles.
-Replace existing pressure treated 5/4 deck boards with new pressure treated pine 5/4 deck boards for
flooring and stairs.
Cover Letter
Minyard, Brian
From: Minyard, Brian
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 10:51 AM
To: Minyard, Brian
Subject: September 12, 2011 HDC hearing
Your Certificates of Appropriateness is ready to be picked up at my office. You will need them in order to obtain your
building permit (which you will be required to obtain for your improvements).
Please let me know if you will pick these up or if you wish to have them mailed to you.
Thank you,
Brian Minyard, AICP
bminyard@littlerock.org
(501) 371-4789
fax (501) 399-3435
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
Minyard, Brian
From: Minyard, Brian
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 3:31 PM
To: Stefan Vickery (E-mail)
Subject: Emailing: 904-906 commerce staff Report 071111, staff report letter 071111
I
904-906 commerce
staff Report ...
PO
staff report letter
071111.pdf...
here is no need for you to come to the meeting next Monday since you are being
deferred. Unless, you want to come and see how it works.
Brian Minyard, AICP
bminyard@littlerock.org
(501) 371-4789
fax (501) 399-3435
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
1
The work of the HDC can also go unnoticed and there
should be more advocacy and information presented each
year on the HDC and its accomplishments. One approach
would be the completion of an annual report that is above
and beyond the information presented in the annual Urban
Development Report. The HDC annual report should include
the er of Certificates of Appropriateness approved by
th HPC nd the dollar value of these improvements. This
info on should be sent to the local media and also
publicized to the QQA, neighborhood groups and city
officials.
Another way to increase visibility is to have I
PC embers
attend ribbon cutting ceremonies when new b d esses are
opened in historic buildings, dedicate marker hen new
historic districts are approved, and to create mower 'Voint
presentation showing before and after photos of
rehabilitation in the city for presentations before civic groups
and elected officials. The amount of investment in
downtown historic buildings should also be regularly
updated and publicized.
Action — Increase Staff for the Historic District Commission
$*
As additional -e1exi4s for historic areas are approved, there
will be increased demands for review and oversight by the
staff of the Historic District Commission. Currently, ,one
full-time and one art -time Tanner with the Planning and
development Department work with the HDC. This staff
conducts preliminary reviews and approvals for COAs in the
MacArthur Park Historic District, provides information to
citizens on historic preservation, and provides guidance on
survey and National Register nomination efforts.
It is anticipated that there will be neighborhoods in the future
that will seek to come under some type of overlay to
preserve and protect their historic resources. As these
neighborhoods are added either as historic, conservation, or
design overlay districts, there will be increased demands on
the staff. The passage of the state historic tax credit will also
result in more requests for National Register listing and
increasing the city staff would help with nomination
guidance and assistance. In order to be the most effective for
the HDC, there should be consideration to adding at least
one staff member within the next three to five years.
Add St. Cloud
Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas
92
LITTLE ROCK
HISTORIC
DISTRICT
COMMISSION
July 6, 2011
Stefan Vickery
Vickery Construction LLC
5413 C Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
Dear Mr. Vickery,
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
Enclosed is a copy of your item that is a part of the agenda for the July 11, 2011 Little
Rock Historic District Commission meeting. The Staff recommendation is deferral.
If there are any questions, please call me.
Sincerely,
Brian Minyard
Planner II
Action — Improve the Knowledge and Expertise of the
Review Boards Through Regular Training
Members of the Historic District Commission and Capitol
Zoning Design Review Committee are expected to have
certain levels of expertise in architecture and historic
preservation. However, new members often need some level
of training and orientation as to how these review bodies
operate, what kinds of decisions they have typically made in
the past and how they generally approach design review
requests. Long-term members of these review bodies also
need regular updates and training in order to keep up with
new materials for rehabilitation, make their decisions as
consistent as possible, and share knowledge among members
in other communities.
The Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP)
provides training for HDC members several times a year.
HDC members should make it a priority to take advantage of
these training sessions as often as possible. The AHPP
annually sponsors the Arkansas Preservation Conference,
in conjunction with the Historic Preservation Alliance of
Arkansas. In recent years, the state office has also hosted a
CAMP (Commission Assistance & Mentoring Program) the
day before the state conference.
Additionally, AHPP sponsors 2-3 trainings per year on
some advanced topics (recent past resources, demolition by
neglect). These are typically geared toward staff, but
commissioners are encouraged to attend as well. The&ty of
Little Rock is encouraged to apply for grant funding to send
their staff to these quarterly training meeting)�dnd their
commissioners to CAMP.
Over the past several years the Arkansas Historic
Preservation Program has provided grants to members of the
Little Rock HDC to travel to the bi-annual conference of the
National Alliance of Preservation Commissions. This nation-
wide organization supports the work of design review boards
and commissions across the country through an on-line list -
serve, newsletters and bi-annual conference. The city and
state should continue to apply for grants and send as many
HDC and CZD members to the NAPC conference as
possible.
The National Alliance of Preservation
Commissions supports the work of review
boards and commissions such as in Little
Rock.
CA.%P
CommimmAzWtanoe and Mentorirg Program
Remember summer Camp?
r V" bad ran. mPJ. Nl.ndr. e.0
I.nn.d rMriQr yaa n.ru ine=
�v,dhl. Wlul� lhr [oxnr.bn Wd
NMgwt G;t P J9 e
(C-Ma)
end 1 . 0.:nQ m+a9rem
tC=w�, y..,.r IYrt �.
It'r do rfrtfnalw. Ngh..nwey
orvwari+cwwndi.a ro .rteYl ww
{ratNnQ n..C.
Na[ionPlly r.coynixed CAMP
err "�"�
mom .l1ai
r iw nW r. wr
.i ,.,,.
um.lwr lrwnfp[el e.aNruation
PrPPaan aclerr IM ewnlry
prvyW. Ih. 1,Yhnt Wre1r1Y
CA4o t.w
trPlnlnp in almarPh... 01
com.rader�. ono c.lebrot�on
f,Ai't3F' Details
Q.N1, PAk C-aP
•..L r ywn.r: G..• »•
�.u..L.eY.nn.wf.4t• .v.
rw.4A.l.ylr� urwr.Y•r
I.67l
ti-nrn;rirMa�.,...",..
utipn+,+s.••
DAY AND A HALF CRP•
••• rN4.Y.•.4 yY�..a '
a�y.rL. � �Iaw unJ.
,�mw�•YM�Mh�MwW �
twrw wa6•rw•;��• ,iz�
M. I
Download;;
CAMP brochure
Past CAMPs1te5 list
The NAPC's CAMP provides extensive
training for historic district commission
members and their staff.
Citywide Historic Preservation Plan, Little Rock, Arkansas 93
�j or ZCP f - ic - 29
River
Market
Frank Porbeck, Chairman
Larry Jacimore, Vice -Chairman
Design
Terry Burruss, Member
Review
Presley Melton, Member
Committee Jim Rice, Member
Planning and Development • 723 W. Markham • Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 • 501-371-4790 ■ fax 501-399-3435
MINUTES
RIVER MARKET DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
July 12, 2011 8:30 am
2nd Floor Conference Room, River Market Offices
Roll call — finding of quorum
Staff called meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. Roll was taken. Committee members present were
Larry Jacimore, Jim Rice, and Terry Burruss. Frank Porbeck and Presley Melton were absent.
A quorum was present. Staff present was Brian M4yard, Committee Larry Jacimore presided
as Action Chair.
_ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
LITTLE ROCK
'? HISTORIC 723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
DISTRICT
COMMISSION Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435
STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. Two.
DATE: July 11, 2011
APPLICANT: Stefan Vickery, Vickery Construction LLC
ADDRESS: 904-906 Commerce Street
COA REQUEST: Siding and Trim; Porch Rebuild; and Windows
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends this item be deferred to the August 8,
2011 hearing because the applicant did not receive his
list form the abstract company in time, therefore, letters
were not mailed to property owners in a timely manner.
� -
?m��r,L
r `i1 i �•�• s�Toi
1Y �
^_ TT1N
f�•l I ,
A .
rsON 8 arcs
'N
ps 4
Location of Project